Phonetic Journey: Sound in Singable Translations

by

Kyron Basu

Diploma in Music, Camosun College, 2016Bachelor of Music, University of Victoria, 2018

A Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillmentof the Requirements for the Degree of

MASTER OF ARTS

in the School of Music

© Kyron Basu, 2020

University of VictoriaAll rights reserved. This Thesis may not be reproduced in whole or in part, by photocopy or other

means, without the permission of the author.

We acknowledge with respect the Lekwungen peoples on whose traditional territory the universitystands and the Songhees, Esquimalt and WSÁNEĆ peoples whose historical relationships with the land

continue to this day.

ii

Phonetic Journey: Sound in Singable Translations

by

Kyron Basu

Diploma in Music, Camosun College, 2016Bachelor of Music, University of Victoria, 2018

Supervisory Committee

Dr. Joseph Salem, SupervisorDepartment of Fine Arts

Benjamin Butterfield, Departmental MemberDepartment of Fine Arts

iii

Abstract

Singable translations have a long history as a tool to broaden the reach of foreign language

music to new audiences. Current translation theory prioritizes the transfer of poetic meaning and

structure. I argue that the phonetic sounds of a poem serve a musical function which is, in many

cases, intimately bound to a composer’s setting of that poem. I propose that the phonetic properties of

a poem are important expressive devices that should be given equal consideration to semantic

content.

I develop a theory called Expressive Phonetic Mapping to effectively describe and translate

phonetic features of musical significance. I apply this theory to selections from Franz Schubert’s

Winterreise, analyzing existing translations by Harold Heiberg and Jeremy Sams. Supplementing my

arguments with formal analysis, I show how modifications to the type and placement of speech sounds

at critical moments can enhance the expressiveness and coherence of these translations, often with

minimal change to or loss of semantic information.

My thesis culminates in an original singable translation of Hugo Wolf’s “Fussreise,” where I

combine Expressive Phonetic Mapping with another method of translation: Peter Low’s “Pentathlon

Principle.” I aim to extend existing theories by integrating phonetics into their approaches. That is,

considering how the quality of translations can be improved by giving attention to the vocal sounds

used, and how those sounds relate to the composer’s underlying music.

iv

Table of Contents

Supervisory Committee ................................................................................................... ii

Abstract............................................................................................................................ iii

Table of Contents............................................................................................................. iv

List of Tables.................................................................................................................... v

List of Figures.................................................................................................................. vi

Acknowledgments............................................................................................................viii

Chapter 1: Introduction.....................................................................................................1

Chapter 2: Literature Review............................................................................................7

Chapter 3: Analytical Framework: Expressive Phonetic Mapping and

Expressive Phonetic Tendencies....................................................................13

3.1 Linguistics Terminology......................................................................................13

3.1.1 Consonants.....................................................................................................15

3.1.2 Vowels.............................................................................................................17

3.2 German and English Phonetics..........................................................................19

3.3 Expressive Phonetic Mapping............................................................................24

3.4 Expressive Phonetic Mapping on Larger Scales

and Expressive Phonetic Tendencies.................................................................26

Chapter 4: Expressive Phonetic Mapping in Translations of Schubert’s Winterreise........29

4.1 “Gute Nacht”.......................................................................................................29

4.2 “Der Lindenbaum”..............................................................................................45

4.3 “Letzte Hoffnung”................................................................................................52

Chapter 5: Translating Wolf’s “Fussreise”........................................................................61

5.1 Low’s “Pentathlon Principle”...............................................................................61

5.2 “Fussreise”.........................................................................................................64

Chapter 6: Conclusion......................................................................................................82

Bibliography.....................................................................................................................88

v

List of Tables

Table 3.1a: English consonant sounds arranged according to manner

and place of articulation................................................................................20

Table 3.1b: German consonant sounds arranged according to manner and

place of articulation.......................................................................................21

Table 3.2a: English vowel sounds used in lyric diction.....................................................22

Table 3.2b: German vowel sounds used in lyric diction....................................................23

vi

List of Figures

Figure 3.1: Diagram of the vocal tract and placement of articulators................................15

Figure 3.2a: Primary cardinal vowels...............................................................................18

Figure 3.2b: Secondary cardinal vowels...........................................................................18

Figure 3.3: “Letzte Hoffnung” from Schubert’s Winterreise, mm. 33-38............................27

Figure 3.4: First line of the final stanza of “Gute Nacht,” with IPA transcription................28

Figure 3.5: Singable translation of the first line from the final stanza of “Gute Nacht.”.....28

Figure 4.1: Original text and my own poetic English translation for “Gute Nacht.”............30

Figure 4.2: The first two lines of “Gute Nacht” with stress patterns indicated...................31

Figure 4.3: Internal structure of each strophe. Measure numbers start from

the piano intro/interlude beginning each strophe. Alternate keys

only affect the final strophe.............................................................................31

Figure 4.4: Strophes 1-2 of “Gute Nacht,” phrases marked above the staff......................32

Figure 4.5: Schubert’s line groupings in each strophe......................................................35

Figure 4.6: Stressed vowels in the rhymes of lines 1-4 in each stanza............................36

Figure 4.7: Singable English translations of “Gute Nacht” by Harold Heiberg

and Jeremy Sams..........................................................................................39

Figure 4.8: Reduction of Heiberg’s third stanza to its poetic form,

without the clarifying repetitions.....................................................................41

Figure 4.9: Lines of each stanza in Sams’ translation and the

corresponding musical phrases......................................................................43

Figure 4.10: Lines 5-8 of Müller’s text and lines 5-10 of Sams’ translation.......................44

Figure 4.11: Lines 5-11 of Sams’ final stanza...................................................................44

Figure 4.12: German text for “Der Lindenbaum,” along with my own

poetic English translation..............................................................................46

Figure 4.13: Musical structure of “Der Lindenbaum.”.......................................................47

Figure 4.14: Schubert’s line groupings in each strophe....................................................48

Figure 4.15: The first line of stanza 5...............................................................................49

Figure 4.16a: Measures 45-49 of “Der Lindenbaum,” with translations

by Harold Heiberg (second line) and Jeremy Sams (bottom line)...............50

Figure 4.16b: Singable translations of the first line of stanza 5........................................50

Figure 4.17: Revision to Sams’ opening line of stanza 5..................................................51

vii

Figure 4.18: Original text and my own poetic translation for “Letzte Hoffnung.”...............52

Figure 4.19: Musical structure of “Letzte Hoffnung.”.........................................................53

Figure 4.20: Section 1 (mm. 4-24) of “Letzte Hoffnung” with phrases labelled

above the staff..............................................................................................54

Figure 4.21: Measures 13-18 with the original German text and translations

by Heiberg (second line), Sams (third line), and myself (bottom line)...........56

Figure 4.22a: Singable translations of the first line of the second stanza.........................57

Figure 4.22b: My own singable translation of the first line of the second stanza..............57

Figure 4.23: The second section of “Letzte Hoffnung” with phrases labeled....................58

Figure 4.24: Singable translations of the last line of text in “Letzte Hoffnung,”

with IPA transcriptions..................................................................................60

Figure 5.1: Singable English translation of Strauss’ Allerseelen by John Bernhoff...........63

Figure 5.2: Original text and my own poetic translation for “Fussreise”............................65

Figure 5.3: Poetic analysis of “Fussreise.”.......................................................................66

Figure 5.4: Formal structure of “Fussreise.”.....................................................................67

Figure 5.5: “Fussreise,” mm. 4-12....................................................................................69

Figure 5.6: “Fussreise,” mm. 35-36..................................................................................71

Figure 5.7: “Fussreise,” mm. 51-54..................................................................................71

Figure 5.8: Preliminary translation of the first stanza........................................................72

Figure 5.9: Improved translation of the first stanza...........................................................73

Figure 5.10: First line of “Fussreise” with IPA transcription...............................................74

Figure 5.11: Translation of the opening line of “Fussreise”, with IPA comparison

to the German text........................................................................................74

Figure 5.12: Verse 1 of “Fussreise” in singable English...................................................75

Figure 5.13: Singable English text for “Fussreise.”...........................................................77

Figure 5.14: Singable translation with full score...............................................................78

Figure 6.1: Opening line of the fifth stanza of “Der Lindenbaum,” with

three singable translations.............................................................................82

viii

Acknowledgments

I am deeply indebted to my supervisor, Dr. Joseph Salem, for his guidance throughout my research.

From engaging seminars to insightful discussions, Dr. Salem has encouraged me to dig beneath the surface of

my projects and to explore their connections to broader issues.

I am also profoundly grateful to my voice teacher and mentor, Benjamin Butterfield, for his unwavering

and enthusiastic support, for opening up countless opportunities for development and performance, and for many

hours of immensely valuable (and entertaining!) lessons.

A heartfelt thanks to Dr. Harald Krebs, whose kindness and generosity as a teacher continue to serve as a

source of inspiration. I am also thankful to Dr. Kinza Tyrrell, whose coachings and encouragement have helped

me in numerous ways.

I sincerely thank the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council for funding my research.

1

Chapter 1 - Introduction

Audiences have long faced the challenge of understanding the text of sung music,

particularly in large spaces such as theaters and concert halls. Before the advent of surtitles and

other technological advances, spectators of opera would often read from a printed booklet

(libretto) containing the words of the work. As opera increasingly became an international art

form, language barriers presented additional obstacles. One long-standing solution to the

problem of understanding foreign language texted music is the singable translation. Singable

translations replace the original text of a work with a text in a different language, crafted in such

a way as to align as closely as possible with the composer’s music.

Current translation theory prioritizes the transfer of poetic meaning and structure. My

thesis aims to complement existing theories by integrating phonetic considerations into their

methodology. That is, considering how the quality of translations can be improved by giving

attention to the vocal sounds used, and how those sounds relate to the underlying music.

Records of operas performed in translation date back to the late seventeenth century.

Lully’s Acis et Galatée of 1686 was performed in German in Hamburg (1695) and Stuttgart

(1698). Bononcini’s Camilla (1696) was performed extensively in London between 1706 and 1

1728 in both mixed Italian-English and purely English versions. During the nineteenth century, 2

the practise of singing operas in translation was widespread. Rossini’s Il barbiere di Siviglia

(1816) was translated into English, French, and German within five years of its premiere. 3

Meyerbeer’s Les Huguenots received greater popularity in its German and Italian translations

1 “Translation | Grove Music,” accessed January 25, 2020, https://doi-org.ezproxy.library.uvic.ca/10.1093/gmo/9781561592630.article.O003143. 2 Ibid. 3 Ibid.

2

than the original French. As musicologist Philip Gossett writes, “certain operas were more 4

widely known during the nineteenth century in translation than in the original tongue.” 5

By the twentieth century, translation into the local vernacular was common practise in

continental Europe for both opera and song. Translation of art songs notably gained traction in 6

the wake of the First World War, particularly English translations of German lieder. Beginning in

the late nineteenth century, a “cult of Lieder singing” developed in London, with German songs

frequently being performed in concert alongside operatic arias and instrumental works. During 7

the war, hostilities toward the Germans and music of German origin resulted in a dramatic

decline in the performances of lieder. Following the war, however, numerous singers began to

reintroduce the repertoire to London audiences. Overwhelmingly, this resurgence of German

song came in the form of English (or French) translations, as presentation of German language

material was politically risky. Indeed, Danish tenor Mischa Léon’s attempt to program German

songs in a 1920 recital resulted in public backlash. 8

Even as performances in German began to resurface, translation of lieder still remained

popular. In New York during the early 1920s, Australian baritone Nelson Illingworth performed

his own translations of lieder by Brahms, Strauss, and others, including a complete translation

of Schubert’s Winterreise. 9

This interwar period also saw some of the first serious scholarly discussion of singable

translations, notably by the musicologist and critic Arthur Henry Fox Strangways, in his 1921

4 Ibid. 5 Philip Gossett, Divas and Scholars: Performing Italian Opera (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2006): 380-381 6 Laura Tunbridge, Singing in the Age of Anxiety: Lieder Performances in New York and London between the World Wars (Chicago, I.L.: University of Chicago Press, 2018). 7 Laura Tunbridge, “The Politics of Listening Between the Wars: The Politics of Listening Between the Wars,” Representations 123, no. 1 (2013): 56. 8 Tunbridge, Singing in the Age of Anxiety, 54. 9 Ibid., 56.

3

article “Song-Translation.” Strangways’ article represents one of the earliest attempts to codify 10

the process of singable translation. Laura Tunbridge suggests that Strangways’ arguments

initiated a debate regarding the priorities of translation: should musical or poetic concerns

dominate? 11

Today, singable translations both of opera and song face considerably greater

opposition than in the past. Scholarly interest in the subject, while scarce, is increasing.

Objections typically fall under two categories. The first is philosophical, contending that

translations must always be inferior to the original work, or even a violation of it. The second

kind of objection is a practical one: most singable translations lack quality, sounding awkward

and unconvincing in their new language.

The widespread historical success of sung translation strongly resists the philosophical

criticisms leveled by recent authors. This thesis primarily addresses the latter, practical variety

of objection. One need only glance briefly at Theodore Baker’s widely published English

translations of popular Baroque Italian arias to understand where such objections stem from.

Many existing translations make compromises that result in cumbersome texts that do not

function well as song lyrics. Current authors discussing singable translations focus on transfer of

semantic content such as meaning, sense, and allegory, or poetic features such as rhyme

scheme and verse structure, while giving lesser attention to the physical tools of expression

such as vowel choice and consonant placement.

I return to the debate initiated by Strangways nearly a century ago, exploring the

relationship between music, poetry, and translation. Music and poetry have often been treated

as separable (though by no means independent) entities in the translation process. I challenge

this assumption by arguing that the phonetic sounds of a poem serve a musical function which

10 A. H. Fox Strangways "Song-Translation," Music & Letters 2, no. 3 (1921): 211-224. 11 Tunbridge, Singing in the Age of Anxiety, 58.

4

is, in many cases, intimately bound to a composer’s setting of that poem. I propose that the

phonetic properties of a poem can be an important expressive device that should be given equal

consideration to semantic content.

The second chapter of my thesis surveys the methodology of several prominent

translators and theorists, including Peter Low, Ronnie Apter, Mark Hermann, Harai Golomb, and

others. I concentrate on exploring the ideology and priorities of each author when mediating

between textual and musical concerns, situating each author along a spectrum of

composer-centric and listener-centric approaches, convoluted by the interpretive needs of the

translator and physical needs of the performer.

The third chapter develops a theoretical framework, which I call Expressive Phonetic

Mapping (EPM), to link the phonetics of a source text to its target. EPM is a tool that facilitates

both quantitative comparisons of sounds between two texts of equal syllable count, as well as

qualitative and interpretive evaluation of groups of sounds. I begin this chapter by reviewing the

necessary linguistics terminology, before presenting the theory of EPM. I then discuss how EPM

can be applied to analysis and improvement of existing translations, as well as how it can be

used to generate original translations. I emphasize the expressive function of consonants.

Substitutions of dramatically different consonants in a translation can influence the progression

of the music in both constructive and destructive ways, analogous to changes in instrumental

articulation.

In the fourth chapter, I apply this framework to several English translations of Franz

Schubert’s Winterreise. Within the last ten years, a wealth of new translations of Winterreise

have been fielded, making the work a particularly relevant basis of study for current translation

practises. I analyze two recent translations: one by Harold Heiberg (2010), and one by Jeremy

5

Sams (2017). Sams’ version is the most widely known, having been recorded under the

Hyperion label, performed by baritone Roderick Williams and pianist Christopher Glynn.

Choosing excerpts from the above translations, I compare their phonetic content to the

original German poetry and examine how the translators have preserved or discarded phonetic

relationships between music and text. Supplementing my arguments with formal analysis, I

show how modifications to the type and placement of speech sounds at critical moments can

enhance the expressiveness and coherence of these translations, often with minimal change to

or loss of semantic information.

The fifth chapter expands the theory to repertoire without documented singable

translations. I construct a new translation of Hugo Wolf’s Fussreise (text by Eduard Mörike),

addressing the phonetic choices in detail, particularly for expressively significant moments in the

text. However, the primary purpose of this chapter is to link the small-scale phonetic details to

the larger semantic and formal structures treated extensively by current authors such as Low

and Golomb.

The conclusion broadens the discussion further to consider what a phonetic approach to

translation might mean for the concept of translation itself. Treating speech sounds as musical

devices in their own right suggests that much of the translation process may be viewed from a

musical perspective. Instead of simply resulting in a transfer of meaning from language to

language, translation involves attempting to recreate the effects of the sounds in one language

with the available sounds in another.

This view of the translation process is remarkably similar to the practice of musical

arrangement. Peter Szendy considers an arrangement to represent the arranger’s “reading” of

the original work. For Szendy, arrangement is an act of interpretation or criticism. I attempt to 12

12 Szendy, Peter and Jean-Luc Nancy, Listen: A History of our Ears (New York, NY: Fordham University Press, 2008): 50.

6

reconcile Szendy’s position on arrangement with philosophical objections to translation,

suggesting that translation is not merely about reproducing the original work in a new language,

but rather offering a particular translator’s own interpretation of the work and a unique historical

viewpoint. That is, a reading of the work as a whole: its semantic as well as musical content.

7

Chapter 2 - Literature Review

Who are singable translations made for? Most translators agree that the primary purpose

of singable translations is to render foreign-language music more accessible to new listeners. It

may seem obvious, then, that the intended audience is the listening public. However, the

discourse on the topic reveals a more complex set of priorities.

Most writers consider translation to be an act of compromise. Within the constraints

imposed by pre-existing musical material, not all semantic and prosodic features of a source text

can be reproduced in the target language. Ideological compromises, while scantily treated in

most writing, also play a powerful role in shaping individual methodologies and strategies for

creating and analysing singable translations.

In this chapter, I will consider the ideologies of several notable translators. All of them

grapple, in one way or another, with the tension between fidelity to the composer’s perceived

intent, and the pragmatic needs of the listener. Caught in the ideological crossfire are two

performative entities whose agendas sometimes usurp the discourse: the translator and the

singer. I will explore how individual authors handle the friction between composer and listener

and negotiate the demands of the translator and singer.

The most extreme position I will discuss is both the most recent and in some sense also

the most traditional: Anna Hersey stands strongly opposed to singable translations, on the

grounds that any attempt to alter the delicate union of text and music set forth by the composer

results in an unacceptable distortion. Hersey favours printed translations and surtitles, which

allow the original text to be used for performance. In her 2018 article “Lost in Translation”, Anna

Hersey maintains that the work is “greater than the sum of its parts, and each element must be

left intact to preserve the integrity of this unique art form”. Hersey is not making a purely 13

13 Anna Hersey, "Lost in Translation," Journal of Singing 74, no. 4 (2018): 429-436.

8

ideological argument, as she provides concrete examples of shortcomings within widely

circulating English translations of Grieg’s Danish art song, "Jeg elsker dig." For Hersey, the

authority of the composer is absolute, at least with respect to negating the utility of singable

translations. Her examples support her argument convincingly, showing the awkwardness that

can result from a poor translation.

Marianne Tråvén, an active translator, shares some of Hersey’s skepticism. However

she believes that singable translation is permissible, so long as the translator is sensitive to the

period-specific rhetorical language that the composer invokes as well as subtleties of text

setting that go beyond simple word painting. She is less concerned with the specific sacrifices a

translator makes than she is that the translator is fully conscious of the richness of the material

being translated.

In her essay entitled “Musical Rhetoric - the Translator's Dilemma: A Case for Don

Giovanni,” Tråvén explores the rhetorical musical gestures used by Mozart in Don Giovanni. 14

She relates some of these to common musical rhetoric of Mozart’s time, as well as to Mozart’s

own personal approaches to arranging thematic material in response to both superficial features

of Da Ponte’s libretto and more obscure, yet profound, issues facing the characters and their

development.

Tråvén weakens the status of the composer to a certain degree, granting the translator

considerable mediative power. She acknowledges that a translator will inevitably have to make

concessions when choosing which elements of the source text to preserve, but it is the depth of

the translator’s mastery of the source material and its historical context that enables a

successful translation.

14 Marianne Tråvén, “Musical Rhetoric - the Translator's Dilemma: A Case for Don Giovanni,” in Song and Significance: Virtues and Vices of Vocal Translation, ed. Dinda L Gorlée (Rodopi: Amsterdam, 2005).

9

Peter Low, currently the most prolific author in the field of singable translations, concerns

himself largely with the singer and the listener, rather than the translator or composer. In his

article, “Singable Translations of Songs,” Low acknowledges that not all music is necessarily

appropriate for translation, and certainly many faulty efforts at translation exist that do not do the

original music justice.

Low is the only author to rigorously define what he means by “compromise” in creating

translations. For Low, the function of singable translations as performable works of art is of the

highest priority. He calls his method the “Pentathlon Principle”, in which he suggests that

translators strive to balance five independent criteria: singability, sense, naturalness, rhythm,

and rhyme. 15

He ranks singability as the most important of these criteria, considering it to be

“self-evident” that a singable translation must attend to the vocal and aesthetic sensibilities of

the singer. Low also ascribes significance to naturalness, which affects both singer and 16

listener. He has little tolerance for translations that sound stilted or awkward.

The other three criteria fall primarily within the interests of the translator and composer,

and Low allows for their sacrifice in order to maintain singability and naturalness. Sense relates

to the semantic content of the source text. Unless the listener is already familiar with the source

text, stretching its semantic material is unlikely to cause offence. Low considers altering the

sense of singable translations to be much more permissible than in translations of purely

informative texts. Low also notes that poetic meter and rhyme are often distorted to the point of

unrecognizability when set to music, and their preservation is often difficult for the listener to

notice. Hence, these criteria, too, may often be sacrificed without adverse effect.

15 Peter Low, Translating Song (New York, NY: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group, 2017): 79. 16 Peter Low, "Singable Translations of Songs," Perspectives 11, no. 2 (2003): 91.

10

The next group of authors I will discuss are, like Low, sensitive to the needs of the

singer. However, they emphasize the position of the listener as the final consumer of a

translation.

Ronnie Apter and Mark Hermann are active translators of operatic repertoire. In their

book, Translating for Singing: The Theory, Art, and Craft of Translating Lyrics, they extend a rich

set of existing methodologies, including Low’s. While their approach can broadly be considered

similar to Low’s, in that they also view translation within the framework of compromise, Apter

and Hermann nuance their work with several factors that reach into cultural and social spheres.

Apter and Hermann are certainly conscious of the needs of singers, particularly in the

case of demanding operatic arias, where poor vowel choices can cause vocal difficulties. 17

However, much of their discussion is devoted to broader issues relating to the listener. For

instance, how to render characters and their cultural practices in a language removed from that

culture. Another “listener” for Apter and Hermann is the production company, whose executive

decisions at times govern their translation process.

In his essay, “Music-Linked Translation (MLT) and Mozart’s Operas: Theoretical,

Textual, and Practical Perspectives,” Harai Golomb not only prioritizes the listener, but gently 18

attacks the translator-focused premise of Tråvén. He criticizes Tråvén’s emphasis on the

knowledge and gifts of the translator, the fruits of which may not be apparent to the casual

listeners who often benefit most from singable translations. 19

Golomb’s ideology is complex and difficult to situate precisely on the spectrum I have

adopted thus far, because he views singable translations in terms of both their social and

17 See discussion on translating Verdi’s Ernani in Ronnie Apter and Mark Hermann, Translating for Singing: The Theory, Art, and Craft of Translating Lyrics (New York, NY: Bloomsbury Academic, 2016): 37. 18 Harai Golomb, “Music-Linked Translation (MLT) and Mozart’s Operas: Theoretical, Textual, and Practical Perspectives,” in Song and Significance: Virtues and Vices of Vocal Translation, ed. Dinda L Gorlée (Rodopi: Amsterdam, 2005). 19 Harai Golomb, “Music-Linked Translation (MLT) and Mozart’s Operas,” 134.

11

structural functions. The social role played by translations caters to casual listeners who want to

experience foreign language opera in an immediate way. In order to make that experience as

seamless as possible, Golomb raises no issue with sacrificing features of the source text.

However, Golomb cautions that the appeal of opera in the first place is the “supreme semiotic

significance of word/music interaction which takes place in the source text and language.” As 20

Golomb acknowledges, this semiotic significance is precisely what is often lost in a singable

translation.

Jeff Hilson offers a refreshing perspective that not only bypasses the challenges Golomb

wrestles with, but also stands in stark opposition to Hersey’s composer-centric position. In his

essay, “Homophonic Translation: Sense and Sound,” Hilson discusses an extreme kind of 21

translation that dispenses with preservation of semantic content altogether. Instead, the method

seeks only to preserve similar sounds between the source and target languages. Hilson

proposes that the phonetic sounds of a text may themselves be considered music, and that this

music is based on sound, rather than meaning. The signifier replaces the signified as the

dominant poetic force. The result often carries little to no semantic relationship between texts

and is purely focused on sound. The resulting translations are largely nonsense. Hilson is not

referring to singable translations, where meaning is typically important.

We have seen that the tension between the composer’s perceived intent, the needs of

the singer and listener, as well as the interests of the translator interact in complex ways. The

extreme positions of Hersey and Hilson illustrate the stakes of the discourse, though neither

offer practical utility for creating singable translations. Low, Apter and Herman, along with other

“mainstream” voices occupy a productive middle ground that allows them to craft translations

20 Ibid., 142. 21 Jeff Hilson, “Homophonic Translation: Sense and Sound,” in Music, Text and Translation, ed. Helen Julia Minors (New York, N.Y.: Bloomsbury Academic, 2013).

12

that satisfy the interests of their respective audiences. In spite of the emphasis that several

translators place on the listener, it is curious that phonetics rarely emerges as a salient property.

In the next chapter, I will explore this gap in the existing literature and show how the sounds of

language may themselves be seen in an interpretive context.

13

Chapter 3 - Analytical Framework: Expressive Phonetic Mapping and

Expressive Phonetic Tendencies

Hilson’s concept of homophonic translation, introduced in the preceding chapter, may

not be a useful model for singable translations. However, homophonic translation suggests a

useful way of describing, if not enforcing, phonetic features between source and target texts.

Although Hilson does not use this terminology, homophonic translation is fundamentally a

process of mapping. That is, creating a correspondence between the sounds of the source text

and equivalent sounds in the target language. The problem for singable translations (or, indeed,

any translation where preservation of meaning is critical), is too much emphasis on exact

phonetic transfer.

In this chapter, I will describe a more flexible way of comparing the phonetic features of

different languages, which I call Expressive Phonetic Mapping (EPM). EPM aims to aid the

translator in deciding which features are most important in a given song. This chapter is divided

into four subsections. First, I will summarize some necessary linguistics terminology. Second, I

will compare the basic phonetic features of German and English. Third, I will discuss the

mapping of sounds between the two languages based on criteria of similarity. Finally, I will

expand EPM to what I refer to as “tendencies”, or expressive phonetic patterns that occur over

large sections of text.

3.1 Linguistics Terminology

I will refer to Geoffrey Finch’s Linguistic Terms and Concepts, which is a detailed

glossary of Linguistics terminology and theory suitable for undergraduate linguistics students.

Throughout the following sections, I will make use of IPA (International Phonetic Alphabet)

14

symbols to transcribe words into sounds. Many of these symbols are found in the English

alphabet, and often correspond to sounds in an intuitive way for English speakers. I will not

describe the production of every sound, though I will provide examples where distinct German

sounds occur, such as the ich- and ach-laut consonants.

Phonetic transcriptions may be narrow or broad. Barry Heselwood considers the two

levels of transcription to lie on a continuum of phonetic detail. A narrow transcription aims to 22

describe speech sounds in great detail, often necessitating the usage of diacritical marks. For

example, a narrow transcription of the English word “cat” would be [kʰæt]. The diacritic ʰ

indicates that the preceding sound is aspirated. That is, there is an audible expulsion of air

following the [k] sound. A broad transcription would not describe details such as aspiration and

simply read as [kæt]. I will primarily use broad transcriptions, because the general phonetic

properties of a sound are more salient for translation than specific physical properties. Even

very closely related sounds between languages differ in small ways, so it is more useful to

consider which high-level classes of sounds may be substituted for one another.

In phonetics, a branch of linguistics dealing with the specific sounds of language, there

are three primary subfields: acoustic phonetics, articulatory phonetics, and auditory phonetics. 23

The most fundamental of these is acoustic phonetics, employing spectrographic analysis to

understand the physical properties of vocal sound. Articulatory phonetics studies the

physiological means by which we form speech sounds by adjusting the shape of the vocal tract.

Auditory phonetics is concerned with the physical and psychological perception of sound. Of

these three, articulatory phonetics is the most useful branch for this discussion, because it

22 Barry Heselwood, Phonetic Transcription in Theory and Practice (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2013): 144. 23 For a concise discussion of these branches of phonetics, see Geoffrey Finch, “Phonetics and Phonology,” in Linguistic Terms and Concepts, ed. Geoffrey Finch, Palgrave Study Guides (London: Macmillan Education UK, 2000).

15

provides a system for categorizing and comparing speech sounds. I will also refer to auditory

phonetics when discussing the interpretations of sounds.

3.1.1 Consonants

Consonants are the most straightforward sounds to categorize in terms of articulation.

They are the result of specific obstructions in the airflow through the vocal tract, and can be

described by two features: place of articulation, and manner of articulation. Figure 3.1 shows the

primary places of articulation used in speech. 24

FIGURE 3.1. Diagram of the vocal tract and placement of articulators.

24 Reproduced from Finch, “Phonetics and Phonology,” 36.

16

Manner of articulation describes the nature of the obstruction. There are seven that are

of concern for sung English and German: plosives, fricatives, affricates, nasals, approximants

and vibrants. Plosives are caused by a complete stoppage of airflow, followed by a sudden

release. Some of these include [p], [t], or [d]. Fricatives involve creating friction by close

approximation of the vocal articulators, while permitting limited airflow. Examples of English

fricatives include [v] or [θ]. German has two expressive fricatives not found in English: the

ach-laut, [x], found in the word “ach”, and the ich-laut, [ç], found in the word “ich”. Affricates

combine an initial plosive with a following fricative. Two symbols must be used to describe

these, one for the plosive component, and one for the fricative. One affricate in German is [ts],

while an English example is [tʃ]. Nasals redirect airflow through the nasal passage, such as [n] 25

and [ŋ]. The latter symbol represents the “ng” sound in "sing”. Approximants come in two

primary varieties: liquids and glides. Liquids involve approximation of certain parts of the

articulators, allowing free airflow around them. In the case of [l], the tip of the tongue contacts

the alveolar ridge, while air flows over the sides of the tongue. Another liquid is the alveolar

approximant [ɹ], where the sides of the tongue and teeth make contact and air flows along the

middle of the tongue. Glides, also known as semi-vowels, are produced by relatively close

approximation of vocal articulators, though not enough to produce audible friction. [w] is an

example of a bilabial glide in English, and [j] is a palatal glide found in both English and

German. Vibrants involve a rapid series of articulations, as in the “rolled r” [r], or a single tap as

in the “flipped r” [ɾ]. Both sounds are used in sung English and German.

25 Although the combination [ts] does occur frequently in English, as in [kats], [ts] is not considered an affricate in English. Determining whether a plosive-fricative pair is an affricate in a given language is not straightforward, and depends on the phonological and morphological function of the sounds. For further discussion, see Janine Berns, "The Phonological Representation of Affricates," Language and Linguistics Compass 10, no. 3 (2016): 142-156.

17

Each of these manners of articulation may come in voiced or voiceless varieties,

although there are no examples of unvoiced nasals or liquids found in sung English or German.

Voicing simply refers to whether the vocal folds are vibrating during the production of the 26

sound. For example, [t] and [d] differ only in that for [t], the vocal folds are kept apart, while in [d]

they are vibrating.

Consonants are primarily described by a combination of place and manner of

articulation, as well as voicing. For instance, the sound [b] as in “bird” is articulated by both 27

lips, and therefore the place is bilabial. The air is fully stopped and then released suddenly, so it

is a plosive. Additionally, it is voiced. So we call [b] a voiced bilabial plosive. Similarly, we can

describe [ç], the ich-laut found in German. It is articulated by the tongue against the hard palate,

so its place is palatal. The airflow is restricted, but continuous, so it is a fricative. It is voiceless.

We call [ç] a voiceless palatal fricative.

3.1.2 Vowels

Vowels can also be described in terms of place of articulation but there is no specific

point of contact as there is in the case of consonants. Phoneticians often use a scheme called

the cardinal vowel system to classify vowels according to three features: tongue height (or

“closeness”), tongue position, and lip rounding. In this system, there are eight primary vowels 28

and ten secondary vowels, shown in Figures 3.2a and 3.2b.

26 In speech, the voiceless liquid [l̥] may indeed be found in words such as “clear,” however the consonant would be voiced for singing. 27 O’Brien and Fagan also identify the height of the velum as a factor in consonant classification, see Mary Grantham O’Brien and Sarah M. B. Fagan, German Phonetics and Phonology: Theory and Practice (New Haven, C.T.: Yale University Press, 2016): 8. 28 Two other features are relevant to vowel classification: tenseness and length, though these properties are not directly shown in the cardinal system. For further discussion, see O’Brien and Flagan, German Phonetics and Phonology, 10.

18

FIGURE 3.2a. Primary cardinal vowels.

FIGURE 3.2b. Secondary cardinal vowels.

19

Vowels towards the left have the body of the tongue in a more forward position. Vowels towards

the top place the body of the tongue closer to the roof of the mouth. The cardinal vowel system

favours tongue position. Lip rounding, another prominent feature in vowel formation, is not

readily apparent in the charts. The vowel [i], for instance, is unrounded. However, [u], as in the

English word “food”, is produced with substantial lip rounding. The secondary cardinal vowels

are identical to the primary vowels, except that the rounding of the lips is inverted. For 29

instance, the German vowel [y] is produced with the same tongue position as [i], but the lips are

rounded. The vowel [ɯ], found in neither English nor German, is produced with the tongue in the

position of [u], but the lips are not rounded.

I will be using the cardinal vowel system due to its prevalence in linguistic literature.

However, it is important to acknowledge one of its other limitations: the cardinal vowels

represent idealized vowels, not actual vowels used in language. For example, the English 30

sound [i] is not as closed as the cardinal sound [i]. The German [i] is more closed than its

English counterpart.

Vowels are further divided into monophthongs and diphthongs. Monophthongs consist of

a single vowel sound, such as [a]. Diphthongs consist of two vowel sounds in the same syllable,

such as [aɪ] in the English word “my”.

3.2 German and English Phonetics

Let us consider all of the consonant and vowel sounds available in English and German

for lyric diction. The consonant sounds are shown in Tables 3.1a and 3.1b, respectively. In

English lyric diction, it is customary to use the Mid-Atlantic dialect, which is an artificial

combination of British Received Pronunciation and General American English in early

29 Finch, “Phonetics and Phonology,” 41. 30 Geoffrey Finch, “Phonetics and Phonology,” 42.

20

twentieth-century American film and theater. Hochdeutsch (“High German”) is the standard 31

dialect to use for German lyric diction. 32

TABLE 3.1a. English consonant sounds arranged according to manner and place of articulation.

31 Amanda Johnston, English and German Diction for Singers: A Comparative Approach (Lanham, M.D.: Scarecrow Press, 2011): 66. 32 Ibid., 171.

21

TABLE 3.1b. German consonant sounds arranged according to manner and place of articulation.

Each column represents a manner of articulation, and the rows show the places of

articulation. Immediately evident is that neither language has sounds for the majority of cells

and that there are sounds, such as the ach-laut, or voiceless velar fricative [x], which do not

occur in English. Likewise, the English voiced alveolar approximant [ɹ], the initial sound in the

word “red”, does not occur in German.

The vowels for both English and German are found in Tables 3.2a and 3.2b. These

tables are based on the vowels given by Amanda Johnston in her book, English and German

diction for singers: a comparative approach. 33

33 See Amanda Johnston, English and German Diction for Singers: A Comparative Approach. A list of English sounds used in lyric diction is given on pp. 71-77. German sounds are found on pp. 176-178.

22

IPA Examples IPA Examples

Monophthongs

[i] free, leaf, really [ɪ] fit, mitten

[ɛ] head, bread [æ] cat, blather

[o] obey, melody [ɔ] hot, fought, cough

[ɑ] farmer, father [ə] lemon, above

[u] food, rude [ʊ] foot, should

[ʌ] sun, thumb [ɜ] earn, turn

Diphthongs

[aɪ] bright, night [ɛə] air, fare

[ɛɪ] great, day [ɪə] ear, near

[ɔɪ] joy, alloy [ɔə] oar, shore

[aʊ] now, bough [ʊə] sure, moor

[oʊ] oh, know, show [ɑə] are, star

Triphthongs

[aɪə] fire, satire [ɑʊə] our, tower, flower

TABLE 3.2a. English vowel sounds used in lyric diction.

23

IPA Examples IPA Examples

Monophthongs

[i:] mir, Liebe [ɪ] Tisch

[e:] der, gehen [ɛ]/[ɛ:] Bett/später

[o:] wohl [ɔ] Gott

[u:] Mut [ʊ] Mutter, und

[y:] Frühling [ʏ] müssen

[ø:] Tönen [œ] Götter

[a]/[a:] Hall/Vater

Diphthongs

[ae] mein, Haine [ao] Haus

[ɔø] euch, säumen

TABLE 3.2b. German vowel sounds used in lyric diction.

As noted above, the cardinal vowel system favours tongue position. This means that it

does not provide a means of describing the degree of rounding. German has four secondary

vowels. All of these are front vowels, and their degrees of rounding are closely related to the

rounding of the primary back vowels of similar closeness. The cardinal [y] is a close front vowel

that shares its degree of rounding with the close back vowel [u]. In German, it is found in words

such as “für” [fyr]. [ʏ] is a near-close front vowel with the rounding of [ʊ], found in words like

“gehüllt” [gə’hʏlt]. [ø] is a near-close front vowel rounded similarly to [o], found in words such as

“schön” [ʃøn]. Finally, the mid front vowel [œ] shares the rounding of [ɔ], as in “Götter” [gœtər]. 34

34 For further discussion of the articulatory production of the secondary (or “mixed”) German vowels, see Adams, A Handbook of Diction for Singers, 88-100.

24

One vowel that bears special mention is the schwa, notated with the symbol [ə]. This is a

neutral, unstressed sound, as in the first syllable of the word “above” [ə’bʌv].

3.3 Expressive Phonetic Mapping

In singable translations, because the number and stress of syllables is (usually) the

same from source to target text, it becomes simple to compare the phones in corresponding

positions between texts. I define the strength of a phonetic mapping to be a measure of the

articulatory proximity between two sounds according to certain criteria. The criteria differ

depending on whether the sound in question is a vowel or consonant.

A strong consonant mapping shares a manner of articulation. The abruptness of a

plosive is of greater expressive import than whether it is produced at the alveolar ridge as in [t],

or against the velum as in [k]. Either can produce a potent effect. Similarly, fricatives, often used

to onomatopoeically depict motion, may maintain a similar effect across different places of

articulation. For example, the voiced labio-dental fricative [v] in the German word “Wind” ([vɪnt]

meaning “wind”) is evocative of moving air. The voiced alveolar fricative [z] in the English word

“breeze” serves a similar function, though it is positioned differently in the word. An example of

strong consonant mapping would be the first sound of the the German word “Tod” [tot] and its

direct English translation “death” [dɛθ], as both [d] and [t] are alveolar palatal plosives, differing

only in voicing.

A weak consonant mapping differs in manner of articulation. For instance, if we were to

translate the German “Wind” directly to the English “wind” [wɪnd], the mapping of the first sound

is weak, although the final two consonantal sounds map strongly.

I consider the strength of a vowel mapping to depend on proximity on the cardinal vowel

chart, coupled with similarity in rounding. A trivial example of strong vowel mapping would be

25

translating the German word “Wind” to the English word “wind” [wɪnd], as the vowels are very

similar, although the German [ɪ] is slightly more closed than its English counterpart. Translating

the German “Hilf” [hɪlf] directly to the English “help” [hɛlp] also yields a strong vowel mapping

due to the proximity of [ɛ] and [ɪ].

A weak vowel mapping would involve a great distance between vowels on the chart, and

thus in the positions of the articulators. For example, directly translating the German word “Rot”

[ɾot] as “red” [ɹɛd] yields a weak vowel mapping.

The issue of mapping becomes complicated when sounds in the source language are

not available in the target language and vice-versa. As noted, English has no equivalent to the

German ach-laut [x]. The nearest fricative sound would be the voiceless palatal fricative [ʃ].

This has quite a different character than [x]. The German rounded front vowels pose a similar

quandary, although in this case English equivalents with both similar closeness and

forwardness exist, so the translator may choose one of the two features to preserve.

26

3.4 Expressive Phonetic Mapping on Larger Scales and Expressive Phonetic

Tendencies

Should translators then strive to maximize the number of strong phonetic mappings?

Generally not, for a number of reasons. First, it is unrealistic. It is difficult to construct

translations of even simple sentences with predominantly strong mappings. Additionally,

insisting on strong phonetic mapping places severe restrictions on both structure and word

choice. Hilson’s homophonic translation is an example of strong phonetic mapping taken to an

extreme - useful in Hilson’s context, but less so for singable translations. As current authors are

quick to observe, translation is an art of balance, and attempting to preserve one element too

doggedly destroys that balance. The value of phonetic mapping becomes more apparent when

considered at particularly expressive moments, and in larger contexts.

Consider measures 35-38 (Figure 3.3) of Franz Schubert’s “Letzte Hoffnung” from the

song cycle Winterreise. The text, “wein’ auf meiner Hoffnung grab” translates to “I weep upon

the grave of my hope.” The word “wein’” is given special significance in Schubert’s setting by the

large opening interval and subsequent fall of the line. Indeed, Schubert highlights this in later

bars when he repeats the text and gives “wein’” an even more strenuous leap into the singer’s

upper range, signifying both the emotional pain of the character as well as the physical act of

crying. The [aɪ] diphthong in “wein’” could by itself be interpreted as an imitative sound, and this

effect is greatly heightened by Schubert’s setting. As the vowel is also the primary focus of the

setting, being stretched over three and then two notes, it is reasonable to give it priority when

translating.

27

FIGURE 3.3. “Letzte Hoffnung” from Schubert’s Winterreise, mm. 33-38.

One possible translation would be “weep, weep, for all my hopes are dead.” As few people cry

on the [i] vowel, “weep” destroys the onomatopoeic effect! Here, “cry” is a better choice,

because the strong mapping at the most critical expressive moment of the passage preserves

the onomatopoeic effect so carefully highlighted by Schubert. The weaker mappings of the

surrounding consonants (and even the following words) are of lesser importance, given that

Schubert chose to place such emphasis on the word “wein’.”

Expressive Phonetic Mapping is a useful concept in a more abstract sense as well.

Situations arise where not every sound is directly important, but together a group of phones

creates a particular expressive effect, which I shall call an Expressive Phonetic Tendency

(EPT).

Consider now a line from the final stanza of “Gute Nacht,” the opening of Winterreise

with its phonetic transcription, shown in Figure 3.4. This translates to “your dreams will not be

disturbed.” This is a tender moment in the song, when the character leaves his beloved silently

in the night. “Gute Nacht” will be discussed in greater detail in the next chapter, but it is enough

to know that the text is iambic, meaning the stress falls on every second syllable. Notice the

density of anterior fricatives ([v], [ç], and [ʃ]) found on these stressed syllables. Pronounced

28

lightly, these fricatives are highly evocative of the character’s hushed and thoughtful departure.

This momentary preference for frontal fricatives is an EPT.

Will dich im Traum nicht stören [vɪl dɪç ɪm tɾaom nɪçt ‘ʃtøɾən]

FIGURE 3.4. First line of the final stanza of “Gute Nacht,” with IPA transcription.

One possible translation that preserves the tendency towards frontal fricatives is shown

in Figure 3.5. The precise semantics have been compromised, but the overall meaning remains.

Here, the mapping occurs at the tendency level, rather than the level of the individual phones.

The dominant phonetic character is mapped in a general sense.

So shall I leave you sleeping [soʊ ʃæl aɪ liv ju ‘slipɪŋ]

FIGURE 3.5. Singable translation of the first line from the final stanza of “Gute Nacht.”

Expressive Phonetic Mapping is a useful tool to understand how sounds from the source

language can be transferred to the target language at both small and large scales. It serves

both in an analytical and generative capacity. Analytically, EPM can reveal relationships

between source and target texts and be used to evaluate the effectiveness of those

relationships. In the next chapter, I will apply EPM to existing singable translations of songs

from Winterreise, primarily “Gute Nacht,” “Der Lindenbaum,” and “Letzte Hoffnung.”

Generatively, EPM can be used to create new translations that preserve, or deliberately

distort phonetic features of the source text. In the fifth chapter I will use EPM to write a

translation of Hugo Wolf’s “Fussreise,” where the technique facilitates the preservation of certain

expressive phonetic moments.

29

Chapter 4 - Expressive Phonetic Mapping in Translations of

Schubert’s Winterreise

In this chapter, I will apply Expressive Phonetic Mapping to analyze and revise singable

translations of Franz Schubert’s Winterreise by Harold Heiberg (2010) and Jeremy Sams

(2017). I will focus on three songs: “Gute Nacht,” “Der Lindenbaum,” and “Letzte Hoffnung.”

Each song has interpretively significant phonetic properties. I will discuss these properties in the

original texts, and then compare those texts to the translations by Heiberg and Sams through

the analytical lens of EPM. When appropriate, I will also provide revised translations that more

strongly map isolated phonetic events as well as tendencies.

Franz Schubert’s song cycle Winterreise, composed in 1827 to the text of Wilhelm

Müller, is one of the centerpieces of the German Lied repertoire. The cycle traces the journey of

the protagonist, a wanderer, through a frigid winterscape as he struggles with his own grief.

Sams’ and Heiberg’s translations illustrate two different approaches to rendering the cycle in

English. Overall, Heiberg aims for greater literality and fidelity to Müller’s original poetry in both

content and form. Sams allows more flexibility in his interpretation and aims for a colloquial

delivery that is both readily intelligible and admirably free of awkward phrasing.

4.1 “Gute Nacht”

“Gute Nacht” is the first song in Winterreise. The wanderer finds that his love has fallen

for someone else, and so he sets off by himself in the snow. Before he does so, he writes the

words “Gute Nacht,” (Good night) on his beloved’s gate, so that she might know that he was

thinking of her.

30

“Gute Nacht” provides a fruitful platform to examine the interpretive impact of phonetic

tendencies. In chapter 3, I briefly examined a tendency in the opening line of the final stanza

towards fricative sounds. Here, I will consider broader tendencies in the vowel selection.

German English Fremd bin ich eingezogen, A stranger I came, Fremd zieh' ich wieder aus. A stranger I depart again. Der Mai war mir gewogen May was kind to me Mit manchem Blumenstrauß. With many bunches of flowers. Das Mädchen sprach von Liebe, The maiden spoke of love, Die Mutter gar von Eh', - Her mother even of marriage, Nun ist die Welt so trübe, Now the world is bleak, Der Weg gehüllt in Schnee. The path covered in snow. Ich kann zu meiner Reisen I cannot choose the time Nicht wählen mit der Zeit, of my journey: Muß selbst den Weg mir weisen I must find my own path In dieser Dunkelheit. in this darkness. Es zieht ein Mondenschatten A moon-cast shadow goes Als mein Gefährte mit, with me as my companion. Und auf den weißen Matten And on the white meadows, Such' ich des Wildes Tritt. I search for deer tracks. Was soll ich länger weilen, Why should I stay any longer, Daß man mich trieb hinaus? Until I am driven out? Laß irre Hunde heulen Let stray dogs howl Vor ihres Herren Haus; Outside their master’s house! Die Liebe liebt das Wandern - Love likes to wander, Gott hat sie so gemacht - God has made it so – Von einem zu dem andern. From one to another Fein Liebchen, gute Nacht! Beloved, good night. Will dich im Traum nicht stören, I will not disturb your dreaming, Wär schad' um deine Ruh'. It would be a pity to spoil your rest. Sollst meinen Tritt nicht hören - You will not hear my footsteps – Sacht, sacht die Türe zu! Softly, softly the doors shut! Schreib’ im Vorübergehen As I leave I will write Ans Tor dir: Gute Nacht, Upon your gate: “Good Night,” Damit du mögest sehen, So that you may see, An dich hab' ich gedacht. That I have thought of you.

FIGURE 4.1. Original text and my own poetic English translation for “Gute Nacht.”

31

Figure 4.1 shows the text for “Gute Nacht,” as well as a poetic translation. My analysis

will begin with an overview of the poetic structure of the text. Then, I will provide a formal

overview of Schubert’s setting. Finally, I will study the phonetic mappings made by Heiberg and

Sams, showing how they complement or work against the formal structure.

The text follows a regular iambic trimeter, common in both English and German poetry.

Each eight-line stanza is composed of two four-line sections, each with an ABAB rhyme

scheme. Every odd-numbered line features a feminine ending. That is, an additional unstressed

syllable following the third foot as shown in Figure 4.2. 35

u - u - u - u

Fremd bin ich ein- ge- zo- gen u - u - u -

Fremd zieh’ ich wie- der aus.

FIGURE 4.2. The first two lines of “Gute Nacht” with stress patterns indicated.

Turning to musical structure, “Gute Nacht” is in modified strophic form. Each stanza is

set to similar music, with variation in the third and fourth strophes. Each strophe divides into six

four-bar phrases organized according to the scheme aabb’cc’. Figure 4.3 shows the internal

structure of each strophe. Figure 4.4 shows strophes 1-2 with the phrases labeled.

Measures 1-7 7-15 15-23 24-25 25-33 Function intro/

interlude aa bb’ 2-bar interlude cc’

Key i i or I III or IV i or I i or I

FIGURE 4.3. Internal structure of each strophe. Measure numbers start from the piano

intro/interlude beginning each strophe. Alternate keys only affect the final strophe.

35 I shall use a lowercase ‘u’ to indicate unstressed syllables and a dash ‘-’ to indicate stressed syllables.

32

FIGURE 4.4. Strophes 1-2 of “Gute Nacht,” phrases marked above the staff.

33

FIGURE 4.4. Cont’d.

34

The internal aabb’cc’ melodic structure is similar to the lyric prototype classification of

nineteenth-century Italian arias and strophic songs described by Hepokoski. The basic 36

prototype is typically of the form aa’ba” or aa’bc, with an optional coda. The b-section normally

involves a modulation to a related key. In strophes 1-3, this is a move to the relative major, F.

The fourth strophe, set in the tonic major, D, moves instead to the subdominant key of G major.

This final strophe also features an additional repetition of the last line of text, set with a two-bar

coda that repeats the closing two bars of the previous phrase in the tonic minor.

The first three strophes are all in D minor. In the third strophe, Schubert makes slight

melodic changes to both the vocal and piano parts. The gentler fourth and final strophe

modulates to the tonic major, reflecting the wanderer’s tender feelings towards his beloved

(refer back to fig. 4.1). Considering only the musical characteristics, “Gute Nacht” appears to be

structurally straightforward. However, the textual groupings and repetitions Schubert

superimposes over this structure add another layer of complexity, further differentiating the

expressive functions of each stanza.

Figure 4.5 shows the relationship between the stanzas of the poem and the musical

phrases. Notice that in all four strophes, the first four lines of each stanza are set in order with

no repetition. Schubert chooses to expand on each stanza’s last four lines, repeating them in

several configurations. This results in a need for four musical phrases (bbcc) to set these latter

lines, hence the distorted lyric prototype.

36 James A. Hepokoski, Music, Structure, Thought: Selected Essays (Burlington, V.T.: Ashgate, 2009): 151.

35

Phrase Lines Stanza Key Strophes 1-2 a 1-2

a 3-4

b 5-6 1-2 D-

b’ 5-6

c 7-8

c’ 7-8

Strophe 3 a 1-2

a 3-4

b 5-6 3 D-

b’ 7-6

c 5-8

c’ 7-8

Strophe 4 a 1-2

a 3-4

b 5-6 4 D+

b’ 7-8

c 5-6

c’ + coda 7-8 + 8

FIGURE 4.5. Schubert’s line groupings in each strophe.

In strophe 1, the repetition of lines 5-8 mirrors the semantic units of the text. Lines 5-6

speak of the maiden’s feelings for the wanderer, while 7-8 speak of the bleakness of the world.

While related, these two statements do not follow directly from one another, suggesting

individual repetition. The corresponding lines set in strophe 2 share a similar relationship, and

Schubert’s repetition follows the same pattern.

36

While the musical structure remains unchanged (aabbcc) in the third and fourth

strophes, Schubert changes the ordering of the lines in each corresponding poetic stanza

dramatically. In the third strophe, Schubert disrupts the ordering of the original text by pairing

lines 7-6 and 5-8. This cross-relationship is particularly interesting given the translation of these

lines (fig. 4.1). The wanderer speaks of love traveling from one person to another, mirrored in

the changing relationship between lines. In the fourth strophe, lines 5-8 are repeated in full over

the span of the phrases bbcc. Semantically, this makes sense as the thought is continuous. The

wanderer writes “good night” on his beloved’s gate, so that she may see that he had thought of

her.

Having considered the poetic and formal structure of “Gute Nacht,” let us now add one

more level of structural complexity to our discussion: large-scale phonetic tendencies in the

poem, and their interaction with Schubert’s musical setting. In the first four lines of stanzas 1-3,

notice the tendency towards open and/or back vowels (Figure 4.6). Only the ending words for

lines 1-2 of each stanza are presented, as the vowels in lines 3-4 must be identical due to the

ABAB rhyme scheme.

Line number Final word Stressed vowel

Stanza 1 1 ein-ge-ZO-gen [o] 2 AUS [a]

Stanza 2 1 REI-sen [a] 2 ZEIT [a]

Stanza 3 1 WEI-len [a] 2 hin-AUS [a]

Stanza 4 1 STÖ-ren [ø] 2 Ruh [u]

FIGURE 4.6. Stressed vowels in the rhymes of lines 1-4 in each stanza.

37

Why is this tendency relevant? In Müller’s text, it is not clear that it has much expressive

impact. However, Schubert’s setting of the text correlates well with the darker vowels. Referring

back to fig 4.1 (mm. 7-15), notice that the repeated a-phrase descends towards the lower

reaches of the singer’s range and lands securely on the dotted-eighth + sixteenth + eighth

pattern. The landing emphasises the stressed syllables at the end of each line, and thus the

open/back vowels found on those syllables. The warmth and depth of these vowels carries an

expressive heft in a way that most front vowels (with the possible exception of the near-open

front vowel [ɛ]) cannot quite match. Compare the sounds [o] and [i] in the lower range of a

singer’s voice. Most listeners would likely agree that [o] is, in general, a richer sound. The dark

sound is also appropriate to the subject matter, painting a phonetic picture of both the

wanderer’s emotions and the gloomy night around him.

It should be reiterated that the vowel tendency I am describing only applies to the first

four lines of each stanza in the original text. The latter four lines exhibit a wider variety of

vowels. Structurally, each strophe opens with lines 1-4 set to the repeated a-phrase (fig. 4.2).

The consistent opening to each strophe provides an interpretive “anchor”, alerting the listener to

the arrival of a new thought. The anchor also draws the listener’s attention to similarities in

sound between stanzas, such as the phonetic tendency towards open/back vowels present at

the rhyme endings.

The final stanza brings about a curious change in the phonetic tendency. Observe that

the A-rhyme now occurs on the words “stören” and “hören”. The stressed vowels in these words

are represented by the IPA symbol [ø], which is a rounded near-close front vowel. Schubert

chooses this stanza for an abrupt modulation to the tonic major, which befits the narrator’s

feelings of longing and love towards the maiden. After three stanzas, this final stanza breaks the

38

phonetic pattern established before. The more closed front vowels bring a gentle brightness to

the sound.

Let us now turn to the translations by Heiberg and Sams (fig 4.7) and consider how 37 38

each has responded to the phonetic tendencies just described. Given the emphasis Schubert

places on the rhyme scheme in his setting, it seems desirable to preserve the scheme in

translation. However, feminine endings present a problem when English is the target language.

In German, the -en ending is often attached to both nouns (especially plural forms) and verbs

(infinitive and plural conjugations). In English, feminine endings are generally not applicable

across broad grammatical categories. For instance, the -ing ending attaches to verbs, -ly to

adjectives to form adverbs, and -ess often attaches nouns to feminize them. Consequently,

there are inherent grammatical restrictions placed on the translator with regards to the available

sentence structures, if feminine endings are to be maintained. Low notes the difficulty of working

with feminine endings in English. 39

37 Harold Heiberg, "Schubert in Singable English: Winter Journey," Journal of Singing 66, no. 4 (2010): 387-398. 38 Jeremy Sams, Accompanying booklet to Winter Journey, performed by Christopher Glynn and Roderick Williams (Signum Classics SIGCD531, 2018): 7. 39 For further discussion, see Peter Low, “Translating Songs that Rhyme,” Perspectives: Studies in Translatology, 16:1-2 (2008): 11.

39

Heiberg Sams

No friend here came to greet me, I came here as a stranger None came to bid farewell. A stranger I depart The flow’rs of May bloomed sweetly, A summer full of flowers I thought that all was well. And hope within my heart The maiden seemed to love me, The maiden claimed she cared for me The mother bid us wed. I dared believed it so Dark clouds now race above me, Her family approved of me On ice and snow I tread. My hope began to grow

Now everything is darkness A wilderness of snow

I had no choice but fleeing, The road was warm and welcoming For me there is no room. When I arrived in May The roadway scarcely seeing, Now deep in darkest winter I stumble through the gloom. It’s hard to find my way Pale moonbeams cast a shadow The moon has sent a friend to me Companion for me here, A flickering beam of light And as I cross the meadow, I’m grateful for your company I follow tracks of deer. It’s lonely here, at night

But all you show is endless snow Just white on white on white

No longer can I stay here, What point is there in staying? What am I waiting for? This world was never mine Let dogs now growl and bay here, The rabid stray who’s kicked away Before their master’s door. Will howl and scratch and whine Alas, love wants to wander But lovers never linger (It seems God made it so) It’s better not to dwell From this one to one yonder We’ve other worlds to conquer (It seems God made it so). And other tales to tell Alas, love wants to wander, Yes love is like a journey Good night, dear, I must go! And so my love, farewell From this one to one yonder,

Good night, dear, I must go!

FIGURE 4.7. Singable English translations of “Gute Nacht” by Harold Heiberg and Jeremy Sams.

40

May no ill dreams perturb you! I’ll tiptoe past your window I’ll trouble you no more. So you can slumber on Lest step of mine disturb you, I’ll close the gate so quietly I’ll gently close the door. You’ll hardly know I’ve gone I’ll write these words while grieving, I’ll leave a farewell message Upon your gate: “Good night,” I’ll nail it to the tree That you might know, while leaving, So when you draw your curtains I thought of you tonight. I’ll know what you will see Yes when you wake you’ll read it It says ‘remember me’ My love, remember me

FIGURE 4.7. Cont’d.

My analysis of these translations will be similar to my analysis of the original text. I will

consider the poetic form of the translations and how these relate to Schubert’s musical

structure. Then I will compare the phonetic tendencies exhibited in the translations to the

original German text. I will argue that Heiberg’s phonetic choices, imposed largely by forcing

himself to preserve the original rhyme scheme of the text, have resulted in a compromised

sound that conveys less of the wanderer’s heavy spirits than the original poem. Sams, on the

other hand, is able to preserve (and even extend) the open/back vowel phonetic tendency found

in Müller’s poem. To do so, however, Sams modifies the original ABAB rhyme scheme and

discards Schubert’s clever structural use of line repetition.

Heiberg’s translation is generally more faithful to the meaning of the original text than

Sams’, preserving specific information such as “May”, the maiden’s mother speaking of

marriage, the shadow cast by the moon’s light, following deer tracks, and the message being

written upon the maiden’s door in the last stanza. Additionally, Heiberg manages to preserve a

great deal of Müller’s poetic structure while creating a singable result. The rhyme scheme is

entirely preserved, even at the feminine endings. Heiberg is, however, tolerant of archaic words

and awkward wording. For instance, “from this one to one yonder” in the third stanza.

41

The most obvious structural difference between both translations and the original text is

the length of each stanza. In Heiberg’s translation, this is somewhat misleading. The third

stanza, in his published version, is written out to contain the full set of repetitions to make clear

the cross-relationship that occurs in the repetition of lines 5-8 in Schubert’s music. The stanza

could be re-written as in fig 4.8, making it clear that the poetic structure matches the original text

exactly, and the cross-relationship between lines is identical.

No longer can I stay here, What am I waiting for? Let dogs now growl and bay here, Before their master’s door. Alas, love wants to wander (It seems God made it so) From this one to one yonder Good night, dear, I must go!

FIGURE 4.8. Reduction of Heiberg’s third stanza to its poetic form, without the clarifying

repetitions.

Heiberg has discarded the phonetic tendency towards open/back vowels in the first four

lines of each stanza because of the restricted choices in creating rhymes with feminine endings

in English. Instead, he has settled for a mixture of vowels, often the closed sound [i]. For

instance, “greet me” forms a near rhyme with “sweetly”, and “seeing” rhymes with “fleeing”.

Given the downward musical trajectory of the notes these words fall on, and the range of the

singer’s voice that they sound in, Heiberg’s translation lacks some of the dark, fulsome quality of

the original. Instead, the words lend an uncharacteristic brightness to the music which conflicts

with the overall mood of the song.

This phonetic conflict is a problem that cannot adequately be analyzed using current

translations methods, such as Low’s Pentathlon Principle, mentioned in Chapter 2. The problem

42

is not a fault with the semantics of the translation, nor its singability, but an aesthetic friction that

develops when words and music are combined.

Turning to Sams’ translation, we notice that he has taken greater semantic liberties. Little

specific information is maintained, at least in its relative position within Müller’s text. “May” has

been moved to the second stanza, with “summer” taking its place in the first. We thus have a

substantially different semantic structure in Sams’ version. Even the tone of the final stanza

takes on a different character. In a literal interpretation of Müller, as well as in Heiberg’s

translation, the stanza is gentle and loving. Sams’ wanderer, instead of wishing his love a good

night, insists that she remember him. Sams has made clear interpretive decisions that paint a

rather different picture of the protagonist than Müller’s text: Sams wanderer is more self-serving

and demanding.

Sams has also permitted more structural deviation. He has added two lines to stanzas

1-3, making them each ten (instead of eight) lines long. The fourth and final stanza has three

additional lines, making a highly unusual eleven-line stanza. Such a distortion of poetic structure

is not necessarily problematic. For Low, by permitting distortion in some areas, “one can more

easily avoid serious translation loss in any single area, and can ‘wiggle out of the strait-jacket’.”

Indeed, the eleventh line of Sams’ final stanza fits perfectly with the minor two-bar extension 40

at the end of Schubert’s last strophe. However, we have noted that Schubert’s line repetition for

the third stanza produces a cross-relationship within lines 5-8 (fig 4.5), structurally depicting

lovers’ wandering interests. This effect cannot occur, as Sams’ additions preclude the possibility

of varying line repetition. Figure 4.9 shows the new relationship between Sams’ text and

Schubert’s musical structure.

40 Peter Low, “Translating Songs that Rhyme,” Perspectives 16, nos. 1-2 (2008): 6.

43

Stanzas 1-3 Lines 1-2 3-4 5-6 7-8 9-10 9-10 Phrase a a b b’ c c’

Stanza 4 Lines 1-2 3-4 5-6 7-8 9-10 9-10 + 11 Phrase a a b b’ c c’ + coda.

FIGURE 4.9. Lines of each stanza in Sams’ translation and the corresponding musical phrases.

Sams has also dispensed with the rhymes with feminine endings found on lines 1 and 3

of each stanza in the original text. For example, in the first stanza, “stranger” does not rhyme

with “flowers”. However, Sams has maintained the masculine rhymes of lines 2 and 4, which are

easier to devise in English: “depart” rhymes with “my heart”. Dispensing with the rhyme between

lines 1 and 3 has allowed Sams to choose back, or at least open vowels in his feminine-ended

lines, and to strongly map this phonetic tendency found in the original text. For instance, the

stressed vowel in “stranger” is [ɛ], a near-open front vowel. “Flowers” features the back

diphthong [aʊ]. Similarly, in the later stanzas, Sams’ translation shows a preference for back

and open vowels where Schubert’s descending minor phrases welcome them.

Surprisingly, Sams takes the phonetic tendency towards back and open vowels at the

rhyme endings even further than Müller. Let us consider lines 5-8 of the opening stanza of the

original text, and the corresponding lines, 5-10, of Sams’ translation (fig. 4.10). 41

41 Sams, Accompanying booklet to Winter Journey, 7.

44

Original text Sams

Das Mädchen sprach von Liebe, The maiden claimed she cared for me Die Mutter gar von Eh', - I dared believed it so Nun ist die Welt so trübe, Her family approved of me Der Weg gehüllt in Schnee. My hope began to grow Now everything is darkness A wilderness of snow

FIGURE 4.10. Lines 5-8 of Müller’s text and lines 5-10 of Sams’ translation.

We see a rhyme formed between “so,” “grow,” and “snow,” all three of which employ the

back diphthong [oʊ]. Again, Sams uses back vowels, and their richness feels entirely welcome

within Schubert’s music, even though the original German text contains more varied vowel

choices in lines 5-8 of each stanza. Here, a weak mapping of the local phones actually

produces a stronger statement of the more dominant phonetic tendency found in lines 1-4. The

corresponding rhymes in the second and third stanzas also never close further than [ɛ].

To finish our discussion of “Gute Nacht,” notice that in the final stanza, like Müller, Sams

makes a shift towards brighter front and closed sounds. In contrast to the original text, this shift

occurs later in the stanza, in lines 5-11 where Sams rhymes “tree” with “see” and “me,” using

the vowel [i] (fig. 4.11). 42

I’ll leave a farewell message I’ll nail it to the tree So when you draw your curtains I’ll know what you will see Yes when you wake you’ll read it It says ‘remember me’ My love, remember me

FIGURE 4.11. Lines 5-11 of Sams’ final stanza.

42 Ibid.

45

For Heiberg, there is no such shift, as he employs front and closed sounds throughout.

While Heiberg preserves more semantic content, Sams retains a greater degree of phonetic

congruence with Müller’s text at the crucial rhyme endings. I argue that this recreates the mood

of the original song more effectively, although the structural effects of Schubert’s line repetition

are sacrificed in Sams’ translation.

4.2 “Der Lindenbaum”

“Der Lindenbaum,” the fifth song in Winterreise, follows the wanderer as he passes a

linden tree which is very dear to him, but which he turned away from in the darkness to continue

his journey. As before, my phonetic analysis will be enriched with a preliminary study of the

poetic structure of the original text (fig. 4.12), and a formal map of Schubert’s setting. I will argue

that Schubert’s musical expansion and compression of the poetry plays a strong expressive

role. In “Gute Nacht,” I examined the phonetic mapping of large-scale tendencies spanning the

entire song. Such grand phonetic tendencies are relatively rare. In “Der Lindenbaum,” I will

concentrate on a single phonetic event in the fifth stanza. As a result, the discussion will be

considerably more concise.

46

German Poetic English

Am Brunnen vor dem Tore, Da steht ein Lindenbaum; Ich träumt’ in seinem Schatten So manchen süssen Traum. Ich schnitt in seine Rinde So manches liebe Wort; Es zog in Freud’ und Leide Zu ihm mich immer fort. Ich musst’ auch heute wandern Vorbei in tiefer Nacht, Da hab’ ich noch im Dunkel Die Augen zugemacht. Und seine Zweige rauschten, Als riefen sie mir zu: Komm her zu mir, Geselle, Hier findst du deine Ruh’! Die kalten Winde bliesen Mir grad’ in’s Angesicht, Der Hut flog mir vom Kopfe, Ich wendete mich nicht. Nun bin ich manche Stunde Enfernt von jenem Ort, Und immer hör’ ich’s rauschen: Du fändest Ruhe dort!

By the well near the gate, There stands a linden tree; I dreamed in its shadow So many a sweet dream. I carved into its bark So many words of love; In joy and sorrow It always drew me to it. This night, too, I passed it In the dead of night, Even in the darkness, I had to close my eyes. And its branches rustle, As though calling to me: Come here to me, friend, Here you will find your rest! The cold wind blew Straight into my face My hat flew from my head, I did not turn back. Now I am many hours Distant from that place, And always I hear the rustling: You would have found rest there!

FIGURE 4.12. German text for “Der Lindenbaum,” along with my own poetic English translation.

Müller’s poem is divided into six stanzas, each of which is a quatrain with an ABCB

rhyme scheme. This quatrain structure is consistent throughout. The simplicity of the poetry 43

lends itself well to the folk-like melody Schubert uses for much of the song.

Figure 4.13 summarizes the musical structure of “Der Lindenbaum.” Like “Gute Nacht,”

this song also fits a modified strophic form, albeit of a substantially different character. The

43 A quatrain is a four-line stanza, typically with an alternating rhyme scheme such as ABAB or ABCB.

47

internal structure of each strophe also fits a distorted lyric prototype. In the first two strophes, a

different c phrase is replaced by a modified b, which cadences in the tonic.

Section Intro Strophe 1 Strophe 2 Strophe 3 Strophe 4 Postlude Structure aabb’ aabb’ aa’bc aabb’ + coda Overall key E+ E+ E- to E+ unstable

E-/♭VI E+ E+

FIGURE 4.13. Musical structure of “Der Lindenbaum.”

The structure of “Der Lindenbaum” becomes considerably more complex when

Schubert’s line groupings are considered (fig. 4.14). Notably, Schubert has condensed a

six-stanza poem into a four-strophe song. Strophes 1, 2, and 4 contain four four-bar phrases.

These strophes can technically hold eight lines of text, as each line occupies two bars of music.

Schubert follows this approach for the first two strophes. The third strophe, the most turbulent

and harmonically unstable, contains all of the fifth stanza. The repetition in the piano’s left hand,

coupled with the agitated mood of this strophe suggests two-bar phrasing instead of four. There

are only four such phrases, giving each line of text its own phrase. The fourth and final strophe

returns to the four-bar phrases of the opening strophes, as well as the same melodic material.

With only one stanza left to set, Schubert repeats the first two lines to fill the musical space, and

repeats the last line a final time for the coda.

48

Phrase Lines Stanza

Strophe 1 a 1-2 1 a 3-4 1 b 1-2 2 b’ 3-4 2

Strophe 2 a 1-2 3

a 3-4 3 b 1-2 4 b’ 3-4 4

Strophe 3 a 1 5 a’ 2 5 b 3 5 c 4 5

Strophe 4 a 1-2 6 a 3-4 6 b 1-2 6 b’ 3-4 6

FIGURE 4.14. Schubert’s line groupings in each strophe.

As in “Gute Nacht,” Schubert’s line groupings are expressively significant. The first two

strophes are expository in nature and benefit from their straightforward treatment. This

treatment also establishes expectations in the listener. While the harmonic structure destabilizes

somewhat in the second strophe, the phrase structure is still predictable. Perhaps even

hypnotic. These expectations are shattered with the onset of the furious third strophe. This

strophe describes the wanderer’s violent encounter with the winter wind, which blew the hat

from his head. The third strophe is half the length of those preceding it. Even though the

distribution of lines to measures is no different, the shorter phrases and the blustering

accompaniment make the section feel like a wild outburst. As the wanderer passes the linden

tree and the wind calms, the fourth strophe expands the final stanza into the larger structure of

49

strophes 1-2 through repetition. This gives the strophe a sense of acceptance and rest, the

promise of which the wanderer still hears the tree pledging in the distance.

The sudden shift in affect in the third strophe gives this strophe a particularly powerful

expressive function. The shift is conveyed primarily through musical events. The rapid and

furious piano part, the unstable harmony, and the condensed lyric prototype form all contribute

to the abrupt arrival of this strophe.

Perhaps not surprisingly, the phonetic properties of the text facilitate the new affect.

Notice the placement of two crucial fricatives in the first line of stanza 5 (fig 4.15): [v] of “Winde”,

and [z] of “bliesen”. These fricatives have a strong onomatopoeic effect, directly conveying the

movement of wind. Thus, the music integrates well with both the semantic and phonetic features

of the text.

German Die kalten Winde bliesen IPA [di 'kaltən 'vɪndə 'bli:zən] English The cold wind blew

FIGURE 4.15. The first line of stanza 5.

Let us now consider Heiberg’s and Sams’ renditions of the fifth stanza’s opening 44 45

couplet (figures 4.16a and 4.16b). Heiberg preserves the semantic structure more closely than

Sams, as was the case with “Gute Nacht.” In doing so, however, he dispenses with the

onomatopoeic depiction of wind altogether in the first line, as there are no fricatives besides the

opening [ð] in the unstressed word “the”. It is worth remarking in passing that Heiberg’s

translation results in the second syllable of “into” receiving musical stress, which is incorrect.

Such problems of stress are common in singable translations.

44 Heiberg, "Schubert in Singable English: Winter Journey," 392. 45 Sams, Accompanying booklet to Winter Journey, 9.

50

FIGURE 4.16a. Measures 45-49 of “Der Lindenbaum,” with translations by Harold Heiberg (second line) and Jeremy Sams (bottom line).

Heiberg Sams The bitter wind of winter The bitter wind attacked me, [ðə 'bɪtəɾ wɪnd ɔv 'wɪntəɾ] [ðə 'bɪtəɾ wɪnd ə'tækt mi] Blew straight into my face. My hat flew to the ground.

FIGURE 4.16b. Singable translations of the first line of stanza 5.

51

Sams admits greater structural flexibility once again, as the wanderer’s hat flying from

his head occurs in the second couplet of this stanza, not the first. Sams also dispenses with the

fricatives in the first line, and thus the onomatopoeia of the original German poetry. The word

“attacked” replaces the word “bliesen”. However, the harsh plosive, [t], which begins the second

syllable of “attacked”, carries an abruptness that perhaps evokes the wanderer’s violent struggle

against the elements. This effect is particularly strengthened if the performer delivers the [t] with

force.

If neither translation captures the onomatopoeia of the original text, how might one

recover it? Certainly, it seems an important expressive gesture, given the stormy musical

accompaniment, and thus worthy of a strong phonetic mapping. Figure 4.17 shows a minor

modification to this line, substituting “vicious” for “bitter” and “assailed” for “attacked.” The

modification accomplishes two things. First, "assailed,” which now stands in place of “bliesen,”

has the fricative [s]. Interestingly, the fricative now finds itself on the downbeat, a more stressed

location than the [z] of “bliesen.” Second, the word “wind” is the most likely candidate to replace

the German “Winde”. There are simply no good alternatives in English that have a fricative.

Instead, the word “vicious” replaces “bitter” in Sams translation, or “kalten” in the original

German. “Vicious” contains three fricatives, [v], [ʃ] and [s], which can easily be emphasized by

the performer. This translation does indeed recover, with modifications, the onomatopoeic effect

of the original text.

The vicious wind assailed me, [ðə 'vɪʃəs wɪnd ə'sɛɪld mi]

FIGURE 4.17. Revision to Sams’ opening line of stanza 5.

52

4.3 “Letzte Hoffnung”

The final song I will discuss in this chapter is “Letzte Hoffnung,” the sixteenth song in

Winterreise. Here, the wanderer pins his hopes to a single leaf being blown about by the wind.

When it inevitably falls, so, too, are his hopes destroyed. Once again, I will examine the poetic

features of the text and the form of Schubert’s setting. I will then relate these to the mapping of

two phonetic events. The first event is gestural in nature, supporting the rhythmic instability of

the song. The second is both gestural and onomatopoeic in nature. The text for “Letzte

Hoffnung” and a poetic translation are shown in Figure 4.18.

German Poetic English

Hie und da ist an den Bäumen Manches bunte Blatt zu sehn, Und ich bleibe vor den Bäumen Oftmals in Gedanken stehn. Schaue nach dem einen Blatte, Hänge meine Hoffnung dran; Spielt der Wind mit meinem Blatte, Zittr’ ich, was ich zittern kann. Ach, und fällt das Blatt zu Boden, Fällt mit ihm die Hoffnung ab, Fall’ ich selber mit zu Boden, Wein’ auf meiner Hoffnung Grab.

Here and there on the trees Many colored leaves are seen, And I stay before the trees Often lost in thought. I look at one particular leaf, And hang my hopes on it. The wind plays with my leaf, I tremble to my very core. Ah, and if the leaf falls to the ground, My hopes fall with it, I myself fall to the ground, Weeping upon my hope’s grave.

FIGURE 4.18. Original text and my own poetic translation for “Letzte Hoffnung.”

As with “Der Lindenbaum,” each stanza of “Letzte Hoffnung” is a quatrain. The rhyme

scheme is a peculiar case of ABAB, with lines 1 and 3 forming an identical rhyme in all stanzas.

The formal structure of “Letzte Hoffnung” (fig. 4.19) would be hard to categorize

strophically in any way. It is divided into two broad sections, the first of which has a regular

internal structure. The second section is more fragmented and diverse in its components

53

Section Intro Section 1 Section 2 Postlude Structure aa’bc aa’bb

FIGURE 4.19. Musical structure of “Letzte Hoffnung.”

The first section consists of four four-bar phrases, each of which spans two lines of text.

The piano introduction and first section are shown in Figure 4.20. The first two phrases are

melodically related, forming an aa’ pair. While the a-phrase cadences in the tonic of Eb major, a’

cadences in iii (G minor). The latter two phrases begin with similar rhythmic motives, but diverge

thereafter and may be labeled together as bc. The whole section could be seen as a kind of

distorted lyric prototype. The b-phrase modulates to an unstable G major-like harmony (mode

mixture), and the c-phrase eventually leads to V (B♭ major).

This section of “Letzte Hoffnung” is characterized by what Harald Krebs refers to as

metrical dissonance. Specifically, a “displacement dissonance.” This occurs when two or more

layers of metrical motion are equal in the number of basic rhythmic pulses they contain, but

those layers are offset by a certain number of pulses. 46

46 For further discussion of metrical dissonance and the relevant terminology, see Harald Krebs, Fantasy Pieces: Metrical Dissonance in the Music of Robert Schumann (New York: Oxford University Press, Accessed April 2, 2020. ProQuest Ebook Central): 23.

54

FIGURE 4.20. Section 1 (mm. 4-24) of “Letzte Hoffnung” with phrases labelled above the staff.

55

The regular accents in the piano part establish a metrical layer with an eighth-note pulse,

grouped into pairs. This layer is offset from the common meter (or bar line) by one eighth-note,

which causes it to be syncopated against the meter of the piece. When the voice enters in

measure 5, it coincides with the bar line and is thus in displacement dissonance with the piano,

but in alignment with the common meter. In Krebs’ notation, this would be described as D2+1. 47

The displacement dissonance in “Letzte Hoffnung” creates a sense of metrical instability,

mirroring the wanderer’s own volatile state of mind at this point in the cycle. It is worth noting

that the dissonance itself is not stable. At phrase endings, such as in measure 7, the

dissonance temporarily resolves before resuming in measure 8.

A strong phonetic event coincides with the arrival of the b-phrase (and the second

stanza) in measure 13. Figure 4.21 shows the b-phrase with the original text as well as three

singable translations. The piano repeats the opening material again, a minor third higher, and

begins to obsessively repeat a short three-beat fragment of material. The original text here,

“schaue nach dem einen Blatte,” reveals the wanderer’s true thoughts, as the source of his

discomfort is attached to an isolated leaf being buffeted by the wind. This section is particularly

dramatic, and the German text provides a strong phonetic impetus to propel the wanderer (and

listener) into distress: the fricative, [ʃ] in “schaue”. [ʃ] lends itself well to a particularly harsh and

emphatic delivery, although it can also be performed in a very gentle manner. In this case, a

strident rendition adds greatly to the musical forward drive.

47 Ibid., 33.

56

FIGURE 4.21. Measures 13-18 with the original German text and translations by Heiberg

(second line), Sams (third line), and myself (bottom line).

Figure 4.22a shows Heiberg’s and Sams’ translations for the first line of the second 48 49

stanza. Both of these translations choose the same initial sound for the stanza, the voiced

dental fricative, [ð]. This sound is soft by nature, and difficult to produce with any force.

Consequently, the frantic character of the second stanza is weakened. Let us consider a

48 Heiberg, "Schubert in Singable English: Winter Journey," 396. 49 Sams, Accompanying booklet to Winter Journey, 14.

57

translation that takes greater liberty with the semantic content in order to place a powerful

fricative at the beginning of the line (fig 4.22b).

Heiberg Sams Then I choose one fading leaflet Then I try to pick a favourite [ðɛn aɪ tʃuz wʌn 'fɛɪdɪŋ 'liflət] [ðɛn aɪ tɹaɪ tu pɪk ʌ 'fɛɪvɔɾɪt]

FIGURE 4.22a. Singable translations of the first line of the second stanza.

Swiftly flies a single leaflet ['swɪftli flaɪz ʌ 'sɪŋgəl 'liflət]

FIGURE 4.22b. My own singable translation of the first line of the second stanza.

Now the sound [s] initiates the line. [s], while perhaps not as potent as [ʃ], can

nonetheless be performed with considerable force. As an alveolar fricative, the sound is close in

articulatory position to [ʃ]. The resulting mapping is strong, and the musical effect is very similar.

Let us now examine the second section of the song (Figure 4.23). Unlike the first

section, which neatly divides into four-bar phrases, the phrases of the second section are less

regular. The section opens with a brief (modulated) repeat of the introduction before abruptly

beginning a five-bar phrase in measure 26 that cadences on the tonic minor in m. 30. This

phrase can be seen as an extension of a simpler four-bar phrase with an instrumental

interjection in m. 28. An a’-phrase begins in m. 32, but is cut short by an altogether new phrase

arriving at m. 35. This new phrase, which I label b, contrasts greatly with the irregular phrases

immediately preceding it. It has an unproblematic four-bar structure and cadences in the tonic at

m. 38. Schubert further highlights this new melody by repeating it in an extended form and in a

higher register at m. 39. I will offer a moment that occurs later in the song where Heiberg and

58

Sams find different, yet equally convincing phonetic mappings for the very last line of the song:

“Wein, wein auf meiner Hoffnung Grab,” which means, “Weep, weep upon my hope’s grave.”

FIGURE 4.23. The second section of “Letzte Hoffnung” with phrases labeled.

59

The second section spans the text of the third and final stanza of the original poem. The

b- and b’-phrases are the only instance of repeated text in “Letzte Hoffnung.” Schubert clearly

intends for this final line to carry particular expressive weight.

To finish our discussion of “Letzte Hoffnung,” and the songs of Winterreise as a whole,

let us consider the phonetic properties of the text in the last line of Müller’s text. The primary

vowel in the word “wein” [vaɪn] is [a], the stressed part of the [aɪ] diphthong. [a] is an

onomatopoeic vowel for this word, as heavy sobbing tends to occur on open vowels! Schubert

does two things which suggest that a strong phonetic mapping is ideal for this primary vowel.

First, he sets the word in a way that suggests a distress cry, rising laboriously by a fourth and

then falling. Second, he emphasizes the vowel with a melismatic extension. He then stresses

that this word is the most important part of the phrase by repeating it, and then again in the next

phrase with an even larger interval.

Heiberg’s and Sams’ translations of the line are shown in Figure 4.24. Sams has the 50 51

stronger phonetic mapping for the diphthong. Indeed, it is a direct mapping and the IPA

transcription is identical, though the German version of the [aɪ] diphthong is slightly brighter in

practice. Furthermore, the initial consonant of “crying”, the plosive [k], functions in a similar

fashion to the fricative [v] in “wein”, propelling the musical momentum forward into the weeping

gesture. Although the mapping could not be considered strong, as the sounds differ in manner

of articulation, they serve a common musical function. The use of a plosive could even be seen

as a heightened effect compared to the softer fricative.

50 Heiberg, "Schubert in Singable English: Winter Journey," 396. 51 Sams, Accompanying booklet to Winter Journey, 15.

60

Heiberg Sams Mourn, mourn the loss of all my hope. Crying, crying for every hope I had. [mɔən mɔən ðə lɔs ɔv ɑl maɪ hoʊp] [kɹaɪŋ kraɪŋ fɔɾ 'ɛvɹi hoʊp aɪ hæd]

FIGURE 4.24. Singable translations of the last line of text in “Letzte Hoffnung,” with IPA transcriptions.

Heiberg, on the other hand, opts for a softer phonetic interpretation on the whole. The

word “mourn” has a rounder primary vowel, the rounded near-open back vowel, [ɔ]. This vowel

is still open enough to be convincing as a cry. The initial consonant, the nasal [m], has none of

the direct impact of [v] or [k]. However, [m], along the other nasals and approximants such as [l],

lends itself well to prolongation and dwelling. The performer can achieve a more inward cry by

lingering on the initial [m].

61

5. Translating Wolf’s “Fussreise”

In this chapter, I will present a singable translation of Hugo Wolf’s Lied, “Fussreise” (“foot

journey”). My primary objective is to demonstrate how Expressive Phonetic Mapping can inform

existing translation methodology. To that end, I will draw on Peter Low’s “pentathlon principle''

as a theoretical backdrop to frame the translation as a whole.

5.1 Low’s “Pentathlon Principle”

Low’s approach to writing singable translations is multifaceted, and includes: 1) the

consideration of the source text from a variety of perspectives, 2) the subsequent prioritization

of those perspectives, and 3) an attempt to create a balanced representation in the target

language that is ultimately singable. Compromises inevitably have to be made, but the extent to

which those affect the listener’s enjoyment of the musical whole varies. Low calls his method for

creating singable translations the “pentathlon principle,” which he describes in his article,

“Singable Translations of Songs.” As discussed in Chapter 2, He defines five largely 52

independent criteria for a singable translation to aspire to: singability, sense, naturalness,

rhythm, and rhyme. Of these, rhythm and rhyme are perhaps the two most malleable features,

though in practice they are often retained.

In this context, rhythm refers specifically to the number of syllables in a line and the

patterns of syllabic stress. Modification of the number of syllables in a line is not uncommon.

Translators have particular freedom where a syllable is stretched over multiple notes, or multiple

syllables are repeated on the same note. Furthermore, convention allows music to be modified

subtly to accommodate differences in syllable count between text versions. Apter and Herman

present a list of commonly used modifications, which include repetition of notes for additional

52 Peter Low, "Singable Translations of Songs," Perspectives 11, no. 2 (2003): 87-103.

62

syllables, or tying multiple notes to account for a reduction in syllable count. Low observes that 53

the musical setting overrides existing metric patterns in the text, suggesting that it is more

important to create a translation that fits the music, instead of attempting to preserve textual

rhythm. 54

The music itself may also obscure other poetic features of a text, such as rhyme.

Rhymes are sometimes rendered inaudible by the prolongation of text that music typically

creates. We will grapple with the issue of rhyme in “Fussreise” and discover that certain rhymes

can be dispensed with, while others remain audible and important.

Low also argues that sense is subject to flexible treatments. He gives his translation of

the text of Strauss’ Allerseelen as an example, in which specific references to mignonette and

aster flowers are less important than the fact that these are flowers in autumn. Without rigid 55

semantic constraints, the translator has more freedom to create texts that satisfy the criteria of

singability and naturalness, both of which are critical to the quality of the translation.

Naturalness refers to the extent to which the translation sounds “natural” as spoken text

within the target language. This topic includes considerations such as tone, historical dialects

and literary styles, and word flow. If the source text employs a colloquial tone, it would be

unusual for the translation to have a strictly formal tone. Anachronisms, such as using modern

colloquialisms for a Victorian era text can also be problematic. Finally, it is undesirable to

choose words that do not flow well in the target language.

53 Apter and Herman, Translating for Singing, 18. 54 Low, "Singable Translations of Songs," 98. 55 Low, "Singable Translations of Songs," 94.

63

Singable English German

Place at my side the purple glowing heather, the year’s last roses, ere they fade away and let us sit and whisper, love, together, as once in May. Give me thy hand, and let me press it fondly, nor heed lest others see nor what they say. And gaze on me, love, as thou wert wont to fondly, in life's sweet May. While ev'ry grave's aglow with autumn's roses, come to me, sweet, on this appointed day, and as thy head upon my breast reposes, we'll dream of May, we'll dream of May.

Stell auf den Tisch die duftenden Reseden, Die letzten roten Astern trag herbei, Und laß uns wieder von der Liebe reden, Wie einst im Mai. Gib mir die Hand, daß ich sie heimlich drücke Und wenn man's sieht, mir ist es einerlei, Gib mir nur einen deiner süßen Blicke, Wie einst im Mai. Es blüht und duftet heut auf jedem Grabe, Ein Tag im Jahre ist ja den Toten frei, Komm an mein Herz, daß ich dich wieder habe, Wie einst im Mai.

FIGURE 5.1. Singable English translation of Strauss’ Allerseelen by John Bernhoff.

Consider the singable translation of Allerseelen by John Bernhoff shown in Figure 5.1. 56

Low uses this translation to illustrate good reproduction of semantic content, rhythm, and meter.

Low argues, however, that the translation fails to satisfy the criteria of naturalness. He writes:

Whereas the diction of the German source text was reasonably colloquial and contemporary at the time when it was written (c. 1840), this translation is heavy with archaisms such as "wont to" and "ere". In particular, the use of the pronoun "thou" destroys (to modern ears) the touching intimacy found in the original. It is true that archaisms were considered acceptable in the Victorian poetics of 1897; but Bernhoff cannot be said to have replicated or even respected the poet's style and tone. 57

Singability encompasses a wide range of concerns. Singers must be able to sing the

chosen vowels at the pitches given in the score. As closed vowels such as [i] are difficult to sing

at high pitches, particularly for sopranos, a translator should generally avoid such situations.

Vowel length and word stress also affect singability. As Low observes, certain words do not lend

themselves to setting on long notes. In English, small and unstressed words like “it” become

56 Translation reproduced from "Singable Translations of Songs," 89. 57 Low, "Singable Translations of Songs," 90.

64

awkward when given long note values. Consonant choices must be considered as well. Often, 58

one may wish to avoid dense clusters of consonants, so as to allow the singer to move more

freely from vowel to vowel. This may not always be the case depending on the conventions of

the target language. In German, for instance, consonant clusters can be highly expressive.

5.2 “Fussreise”

Hugo Wolf’s Lied, “Fussreise,” is the tenth composition in his Mörikelieder, a collection of

fifty three songs to poems by Eduard Mörike. The song explores the joy of wandering through

the countryside. Though a popular work, “Fussreise” has not received attention from translators,

and I am unaware of any existing singable translations. The text, along with my own poetic

translation, is given in Figure 5.2. Figure 5.3 provides a poetic analysis of the text, showing

basic syllabic stress as well as the number of poetic feet in each line. 59 60

58 Low, "Singable Translations of Songs," 93. 59 Throughout, I will notate stressed syllables with dashes (-) and unstressed syllables with a lowercase ‘u’. 60 For “Fussreise,” this is equivalent to the number of stressed syllables in a line, because the only feet used are the iamb (u -), trochee (- u), and the dactyl (- u u), all of which have only one strong syllable.

65

German English

Am frischgeschnittnen Wanderstab, Wenn ich in der Frühe So durch Wälder ziehe, Hügel auf und ab: Dann, wie's Vöglein im Laube Singet und sich rührt, Oder wie die gold'ne Traube Wonnegeister spürt In der ersten Morgensonne: So fühlt auch mein alter, lieber Adam Herbst und Frühlingsfieber, Gottbeherzte, Nie verscherzte Erstlings Paradiseswonne. Also bist du nicht so schlimm, o alter Adam, wie die strengen Lehrer sagen; Liebst und lobst du immer doch, Singst und preisest immer noch, Wie an ewig neuen Schöpfungstagen, Deinen lieben Schöpfer und Erhalter. Möcht' es dieser geben Und mein ganzes Leben Wär' im leichten Wanderschweiße Eine solche Morgenreise!

Upon my fresh-cut walking stick, Early in the morning I go through the woods, Over hills and away. Then, like birds in the arbor Singing and stirring, Or like the golden grapes That trace joyful spirits In the first morning sunlight: I feel also my old, dear Adam, fall- and spring-fever, Strengthened by God, Never forsaken The first joys of Paradise. You are not so terrible, oh old Adam, as the strict teachers say; You love and praise, Sing and exalt, As if it were always the first day of Creation, Your beloved Creator and Preserver. I wish to be given this, And my whole life Would be in the light sweat of wandering On such a morning journey!

FIGURE 5.2. Original text and my own poetic translation for “Fussreise”.

66

# Feet Meter Text Rhyme

4 u - u - u - u - Am frischgeschnittnen Wanderstab, A 3 - u - u - u Wenn ich in der Frühe B 3 - u - u - u So durch Wälder ziehe, B (near) 3 - u - u - Hügel auf und ab: A 3 - u - u u - u Dann, wie's Vöglein im Laube A 3 - u - u - Singet und sich rührt, B 4 - u - u - u - u Oder wie die gold'ne Traube A 3 - u - u - Wonnegeister spürt B 4 - u - u - u - u In der ersten Morgensonne: X 4 - u - u - u - u So fühlt auch mein alter, lieber A 4 - u - u - u - u Adam Herbst und Frühlingsfieber, A 2 - u - u Gottbeherzte, B 2 - u - u Nie verscherzte B 4 - u - u - u - u Erstlings Paradiseswonne. X 5 - u - u - u - u - u Also bist du nicht so schlimm, o alter X 5 - u - u - u - u - u Adam, wie die strengen Lehrer sagen; A 4 - u - u - u - Liebst und lobst du immer doch, B 4 - u - u - u - Singst und preisest immer noch, B 5 - u - u - u - u - u Wie an ewig neuen Schöpfungstagen, A 5 - u - u - u - u - u Deinen lieben Schöpfer und Erhalter. X 61

3 - u - u - u Möcht' es dieser geben A 3 - u - u - u Und mein ganzes Leben A 4 - u - u - u - u Wär' im leichten Wanderschweiße B 4 - u - u - u - u Eine solche Morgenreise! B (near)

Figure 5.3. Poetic analysis of “Fussreise.”.

The texts of Winterreise that we studied in Section 4 employed consistent rhyme

schemes and a predictable number of feet per line. Glancing at Figure 5.3, it becomes clear that

“Fussreise” has a more complex structure with inconsistencies in the rhyme scheme, meter, and

even the number of lines per stanza. The trochee (- u) is the dominant class of foot, although

61 “O alter” of the first line of this stanza, does appear to rhyme with “Erhalter” of the final line. However, a reader of the poem would enjamb the first and second lines. “O alter” would thus not receive the emphasis of a typical line ending, and not be heard to rhyme with “Erhalter.” Only the interior four lines of the third stanza rhyme audibly.

67

the text opens with an iambic line (u -). Some of the rhymes, for instance in the first and last

stanzas are only near-rhymes. That is, they feature similar, but not identical sounds.

While such an irregular text might suggest a purely through-composed setting, Wolf has

curiously chosen to unify the song by sharing considerable material between stanzas. Donald

Ivey observes that “Fussreise” contains “so much reiterative material from stanza to stanza and

at the same time make so many significant departures that it is difficult to identify the song

definitely as either modified strophic or through-composed.” 62

Section Structure Length Key Introduction 4 D+ Verse 1 ab 8 D+ Interlude 4 D+ Verse 2 ab 10 D+ to A+ Interlude 4 D+ (dom. prol.) Verse 3 ab + piano extension 12 D+ to A+ Verse 4 a + fragments 21 Unstable A- to F#+ Interlude 7 F#+ Verse 5 ab 8 D+ Postlude 6 D+

FIGURE 5.4. Formal structure of “Fussreise.”

Figure 5.4 provides a formal outline of “Fussreise.” The overall structure consists of a

brief introduction, five verses separated by instrumental interludes, and a postlude. Each verse

sets a single stanza of text. These verses vary in length, largely due to the variations in the

number of lines in the underlying stanzas. Despite differences in cadential harmony and length,

all verses (except the fourth) are structurally similar and share much of their harmony. Each

verse resides predominantly in the home key of D major, and consists of eight measures in

verses 1 and 5, and ten measures in verse 2. Verse 3 is structurally very similar to verse 2, but

62 Donald Ivey, Song: Anatomy, Imagery, and Styles (New York: Free Press, 1970): 77.

68

has a two-measure piano extension in place of an interlude, which repeats the last two

measures of the vocal melody.

Verses 1, 2, 3, and 5 divide into two phrases, labeled a and b. In these verses, phrase a

is four measures in length. It begins with a repeating three-note motive (plus an anacrusis in

verses 1-2), largely prolongs the tonic of D major, and sets the first two lines of the

corresponding stanzas.

Phrase b begins in the key of G major with a four-note repeating motive that relates to

the opening of phrase a. In the first verse, the repetition is replaced by a sustained note in m. 9.

The harmonic rhythm accelerates, with a change of chord in each measure. Phrase b sets the

remaining lines of the corresponding stanza. In verses 1 and 5, this is only two lines, and the

verses end with a cadence in the tonic. In verses 2-3, phrase b encompasses an additional fifth

line of text, which necessitates the extension of the phrase to form a six-measure unit. These

extended verses cadence in the dominant of A major.

The fourth verse, beginning in measure 43, is structurally more complex than the rest. It

begins in the dominant minor (A minor), but is harmonically unstable, cadencing in the remote

key of F# major at measure 63. The verse has a clear four-measure a phrase like the other

verses. The repeating note motive appears to herald the arrival of phrase b in measure 47, but

this quickly deteriorates. The rest of the verse is fragmented, as if searching for stability. The

structural uncertainty mirrors the protagonist’s struggle between the words of the “strict old

teachers” and his own desires and emotions.

We have noted the structural similarities between verses 1, 2, 3, and 5. However, Wolf’s

mapping of text onto these musical sections introduces complications, particularly with respect

to the audibility of rhymes.

69

FIGURE 5.5. “Fussreise,” mm. 4-12.

Consider the first verse, shown in Figure 5.5. An obvious way of highlighting a rhyme is

to set the rhyming syllables in close proximity to one another, using related harmonic and

motivic material. Notice that the melodic contour for lines 1 and 4, which bear the A-rhyme, both

descend from V to I. The final, rhyming syllables (“stab” and “ab”) are emphasized with

durational accents upon arriving at the tonic. The events occur in close enough proximity that

the rhyme is audible and enforced by the music.

Meanwhile, the inner near-rhyme between “Frühe” ['fɾyə] and “ziehe” [‘tsi:e] is not 63

readily heard. While “Frühe” in measure 9 does receive emphasis through duration, “ziehe”

63 One may wonder why these two words should be considered near-rhymes. The vowels [y] and [i] are both close front vowels, and the main difference is that [y] is rounded. The vowels are closely related in vocal tract shape and sound. For further discussion, see Adams, A Handbook of Diction for Singers, 100.

70

leads directly into “Hügel.” The inconsistent treatment of the two syllables obscures their

relationship.

Recall from Fig. 5.3 that the rhyme scheme varies from stanza to stanza, and that the

number of poetic feet per line is also inconsistent. In verse 2, the underlying rhyme scheme is

ABAB + X. However, the musical structure does not enforce this scheme. The rhyme between

“Laube” (m. 18) and “Traube” (m. 22) is audible, but weak. The two words are found in relatively

close proximity, but otherwise share little musical connection. Similarly, the rhyme between

“rührt” and “spürt” is largely lost. “Rührt” receives a strong durational accent, however “spürt”

does not. Since Wolf’s setting moves directly into the fifth line of the stanza, “spürt” does not

receive any emphasis by virtue of its structural location either.

In verse 3, the musical structure is nearly identical to that of verse 2, with notable

deviations in measures 32 and 34 to account for additional syllables in the text, as well as the

two-measure piano extension. The rhyme scheme for the second stanza is AABB + X. With the

rhyming syllables situated in closer proximity, their relationships in the verse become much

clearer than their counterparts in verse 2. While the A-rhyme between “alter lieber” and

“Frühlingsfieber” is audible, it is undesirable to emphasize this rhyme in performance, since lines

1-2 of the third stanza are enjambed. The enjambment occurs because “alter” and “lieber” are

adjectives which describe “Adam” on the following line. The stress, therefore, falls on “Adam”

and not “lieber,” despite the latter’s visual position at the end of the line. The B-rhyme between

“gottbeherzte” and “nie verscherzte” in mm. 35-36 is inescapable (see Figure 5.6). Lines 3-4 of

the third stanza are unique in having only two feet. As Wolf’s setting of these lines is syllabic,

the rhyme occurs over only two measures and is thus clearly audible.

71

FIGURE 5.6. “Fussreise,” mm. 35-36.

The superimposition of relatively consistent musical structures over inconsistent poetic

structures leads to variable emphasis on rhymes. Verse 1 brings out the outer A rhyme through

related musical material and structural placement. In verse 3, the brevity of lines 3-4 and their

syllabic setting highlights the B rhyme.

Wolf strongly articulates only one more rhyme, found in the third stanza, between “doch”

and “noch” at the ends of lines 3-4. Wolf sets these lines using a new gesture: a stepwise

descend of a minor sixth as shown in Figure 5.7. The repetition of the gesture allows the rhyme

to be easily heard.

FIGURE 5.7. “Fussreise,” mm. 51-54.

72

Given the complexity of Wolf’s rendition, the structural criteria of rhyme and meter

become significant challenges for the translator. Let us now consider some approaches for

translating the first stanza. Figures 5.8 illustrates one possible translation.

Upon my fresh-cut walking stick, Early in the morning, Through the woods I travel, Over hill and dale.

FIGURE 5.8. Preliminary translation of the first stanza.

This translation has some useful features. Semantically, it agrees closely with the

original. In other words, it preserves the sense of Mörike’s text. One liberty taken is the use of

the English idiom “over hill and dale.” While not entirely congruent with the meaning of “Hügel

auf und ab,” the use of the idiom roots the translation in the English language, instead of being a

strict translation of a German text. From a phonetic point of view, the opening line features the

word “fresh,” which is identical in meaning and very similar in sound to the German word

“frisch,” found in the compound word “frischgeschnittnen.”

On the other hand, the A-rhyme between “Wanderstab” ['vandər,ʃtap] and “auf und ab”

[aof ʊnt ap] has been lost, as has the inner near-rhyme. Furthermore, while a subjective claim, I

consider “walking stick” to be a lackluster replacement for “Wanderstab.” I would argue that

“Wanderstab” carries a cultural association with robustness that is missing from “walking stick.”

While a walking stick certainly need not be flimsy, the word “stick” does suggest thinness. A

synonym such as “walking staff” would alleviate this semantic problem, but neither “stick,” nor

“staff” are easy to rhyme. Their rhymes, such as “pick,” or “half,” make little sense in the context

73

of the stanza. Alternatively, we could use the word “cane,” and its rhyme “plain.” The resulting

translation is shown in Figure 5.9.

Upon my fresh-cut walking cane, Early in the morning, Though the woods I travel, Over hill and plain.

FIGURE 5.9. Improved translation of the first stanza.

The rhyme has been recovered. Now we have agreement in sense and rhyme. The

rhythm of the text matches the original in syllable count as well as stress pattern, without any

undue stresses. The translation is also perfectly singable. Four out of five of Low’s criteria have

been satisfied, but here I will make another subjective claim: the first line fails the test of

naturalness, particularly when sung. It sounds like a deliberate translation, rather than an

authentic English text. Yet there is no problem with word order, and the meaning is clear. I

propose that the fault lies in the phonetic properties of the line, and how they relate to the

underlying music. To improve the line, let us try to apply Expressive Phonetic Mapping.

Returning to Figure 5.5, notice the rising fifth gesture (D-A-E) in the piano’s left hand.

Christopher Hatch finds this gesture, which is also found in the piano introduction, to “color the

sound of the entire song.” The gesture is lively, evoking the singer’s excitement, and perhaps 64

the swinging of the walking stick. The rests give the gesture a detached feel.

64 Christopher Hatch, "Tradition and Creation: Hugo Wolf's ‘Fussreise’," College Music Symposium 28 (1988): 78.

74

German Am frischgeschnittnen Wanderstab IPA [am 'fɾɪʃgə,ʃnɪtnən 'vandəɾ,ʃtap]

FIGURE 5.10. First line of “Fussreise” with IPA transcription.

Interestingly, the German text phonetically reflects these characteristics. Figure 5.10

shows the opening line, along with an IPA transcription. Notice that there are no long vowels

(indicated with a colon) at all. Furthermore, the short vowels in “frischgeschnittnen”, meaning

“freshly cut,” are surrounded by strong fricatives and plosives (the most forceful being [ʃ] and

[t]). It is very difficult to speak this word without a similarly bright and detached articulation to the

piano gesture, which is appropriate given its meaning.

Let us try to find a strong phonetic mapping for the word, and see how that alters the

sound of the first line. To do this, the word “fresh” must be moved to the downbeat, where we

currently have “-pon” of “upon”. A possible approach, with a phonetic comparison to the original

text, is shown in Figure 5.11.

Singable English The fresh-cut shaft of my walking cane, English IPA [ðə fɹɛʃ kʌt ʃæft ɔv maɪ 'wɑkɪŋ kɛɪn] German IPA [am 'fɾɪʃgə,ʃnɪtnən 'vandəɾ,ʃtap]

FIGURE 5.11. Translation of the opening line of “Fussreise”, with IPA comparison to the

German text.

I have adjusted the spacing of the transcription to highlight the strength of the phonetic

mapping between the consonants of “frischgeschnittnen” and “fresh cut shaft”. The placement of

the fricatives [f] and [ʃ] are identical, as is the placement of the plosive [t]. Additionally, the

sounds [k] of “cut” and [g] of “-ge-” are closely related: [k] is an unvoiced velar plosive, while [g]

is the voiced counterpart.

75

There is a further improvement that can be made. “Stick,” unqualified by the adjective

“walking,” could refer to any stick. “Cane,” however, has an unambiguous meaning in this

context. Instead of the “walking,” we might choose a more interesting embellishment. Perhaps

“sturdy,” which recovers the notion of robustness that “Wanderstab” carries. The line now reads:

“the fresh-cut shaft of my sturdy cane.”

Two problems remain to be addressed. The first is trivial: the original line of text was

strictly iambic, but a syllable has been added and there is now a dactyl (- u u) at “shaft of my”.

This is unproblematic because there is an extra note in the music previously set melismatically

which supports the additional syllable. The more serious problem is that the changes made alter

the sense of the text, and require modifying the inner lines. There are multiple solutions to the

problem, and the one I have chosen is shown in Figure 5.12.

FIGURE 5.12. Verse 1 of “Fussreise” in singable English.

76

The pursuit of a strong phonetic mapping has led to a profound shift in the sense of this

stanza: the cane is now the agent stirring the singer to walk, rather than simply being a tool.

This has a certain interpretive appeal, as the song revolves around the singer’s deep desire and

compulsion to wander. The cane now embodies that compulsion. It should be emphasized that

prioritizing phonetic mapping over sense is an interpretive decision on my part as a translator. I

consider this new stanza to be more convincing both in terms of sound and naturalness. The

interpretive role of the translator will be taken up in greater detail in the next and final section of

this thesis.

The rest of my translation was arrived at by similar reasoning to the process followed

above, so I will not analyze any further text here. The completed translation is given in Figure

5.13, along with a full setting of the translation in Figure 5.14. For a more poetic result in

English, I have chosen to draw the title for this translation from the final line of the poem, rather

than translating the original title as “Foot Journey” or “Journey on Foot.”

77

Morning Journey

The fresh-cut shaft of my sturdy cane Carried me one morning, Through the fields and forests, Over hill and plain. Then, as birds in the arbor, Stirring in the treetops, Or the cheerful golden vineyards, Graced by blissful spirits In the earliest morning sunshine. Now I feel in my aging spirit, Adam’s fall and springtime fever, Loved by God And never downtrod, All around the wond’rous joys of Paradise. Yet your sins were not so grave, o’ dearest Adam, as the stern old preachers tell me; Ever loving, praising still, Singing, lauding as you will, Like the dawning of a new Creation, Your beloved Maker and Preserver. How I long to give my life To joyful wand’ring with the Lightest sweat upon me, As on one such morning journey.

FIGURE 5.13. Singable English text for “Fussreise.”

78

FIGURE 5.14. “Morning Journey.”

79

FIGURE 5.14. Cont’d.

80

FIGURE 5.14. Cont’d.

81

FIGURE 5.14. Cont’d.

82

Chapter 6 - Conclusion

Throughout this thesis, I have combined Expressive Phonetic Mapping with existing

translation methods, to push against the practical objections to singable translations. Yet,

perhaps the realities of the translation process force a necessary shift in perspective that allows

us to address the philosophical criticisms of translation. Those who argue against singable

translations from a philosophical standpoint maintain that any translation must be inferior to the

original, since that translation must compromise certain characteristics of the source material,

be they semantic, prosodic, or phonetic characteristics. As we have established, translators

must make choices about which features of a source text to preserve. They must also choose

their methods for rendering those features in the target language. But those methods are not

mathematical functions with only one output for a given input.

Similar to existing translation methods, EPM provides a set of guiding principles rather

than a rigorous way to arrive at a single “correct” result. In Section 4.2, we examined three

possible translations of a line from Schubert’s “Der Lindenbaum.” There, I suggested that

translations by Heiberg and Sams could be improved with the application of EPM. The line and

its translations are shown again in Figure 6.1.

Die kalten Winde bliesen, Müller The bitter wind of winter Heiberg The bitter wind attacked me, Sams The vicious wind assailed me, Basu

FIGURE 6.1. Opening line of the fifth stanza of “Der Lindenbaum,” with three singable translations.

Having spent much of this thesis arguing for the importance of EPM, I pose the following

question: is the translation arrived at in Section 4.2, through application of EPM, really better

83

than the others? Yes and no. My goal in devising that translation was to highlight the phonetic

depiction of wind given by the consonants [v] in “Winde,” and [z] in “bliesen.” By this criterion,

my translation does indeed seem more effective than either Heiberg’s or Sams’ solution.

Depicting wind, however, is not the only motive one might have as a translator. Sams’

translation employs several plosives in place of fricatives, yielding a more angular and forceful

result. In terms of sound, Sams’ line lends itself well to an aggressive performance, perhaps

evoking the wanderer’s visceral struggle against the elements. Heiberg’s translation is

phonetically subdued by comparison, making greater use of the gentle glide [w]. One might

interpret the softer sounds as describing the wanderer’s inner state of mind, rather than his

outward struggles. EPM functions as a lens through which to focus and refine a translator’s

interpretive perspective.

Instead of attempting to argue that one translation is inherently superior to the others, I

propose the view that each of the above translations is more effective at conveying a particular

interpretation, to the exclusion of others. Herein lies a problem facing translation, expressed

elegantly by Strangways. He writes: “Translators will always be criticised for the omission of

those things they were not trying to include; they are not always given credit for what they

succeeded in including.” 65

A translation, then, reflects a particular translator’s understanding of a work at a given

time: an interpretation. Viewing translation (singable or otherwise) as an interpretive act is by no

means new. Even in “formal translation” that seeks precision, Burton Raffel notes that:

Though he [the translator] often thinks that his goal is a kind of mirror image of the

original, a precise reduction achieved by a process of bodily transference, in fact he is

65A. H. Fox Strangways "Song-Translation," Music & Letters 2, no. 3 (1921): 223.

84

most likely to give his readers the ideas, the social and philosophical orientations, the

information, and the historical data contained in his original. 66

For Raffel, there is a subjective, interpretive element that subverts accurate reproduction

even in the most objective of translations.

Renatto Poggioli, in an essay from the seminal Harvard collection “On Translation,” also

attacks the view of a translator as simply an “imitator” when he writes:

At any rate what moves the genuine translator is not a mimetic urge, but an elective

affinity: the attraction of a content so appealing that he can identify it with a content of his

own, thus enabling him to control the latter through a form which, though not inborn, is at

least congenial to it. 67

That a translator might exert control through interpretation was considered earlier by

Nietzsche. He observes that when the Romans translated works from Greek antiquity, the works

were effectively stripped of many historical nuances, instead absorbed into a contemporary

Roman perspective. Nietzsche believed that for the Romans, “translation was a form of

conquest”. 68

While most translators of song are unlikely to be motivated by such an extreme goal as

conquest, a translator is still responsible for inflicting a certain amount of control and judgement

upon a text. Judgement is a crucial characteristic of translation for Smith Palmer Bovie. In his

66 Burton Raffel, The Art of Translating Poetry. (University Park, P.A.: Pennsylvania State University Press, 1988): 112. 67 Renato Poggioli, “The Added Artificer,” in On Translation, ed. Reuben A. Brower (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1959): 141. 68 Friedrich Nietzsche, “Translation as Conquest,” trans. Walter Kaufmann, in Western Translation Theory: From Herodotus to Nietzsche, 2nd ed (Northampton, M.A.: St. Jerome Pub, 2002): 262.

85

essay, “Translation as a Form of Criticism,” Bovie argues that the judgements made by a

translator are akin to those made by a literary critic. The two roles are, Bovie’s view,

interchangeable in a sense. He writes that “often enough, criticism is telling us what the poet

really said, but saying this in the other language, the language of criticism.” For Bovie, 69

translators are critics, and critics are translators.

If translation is an interpretive act, its aim is not simply objective reproduction. The

translator’s own perspective is an integral component of the end product. Objections to a

translation, then, should not be limited solely by the translation’s accuracy or its ability to

capture the full poetic nuances of the source text.

To conclude my thesis, I will explore the similarities between singable translations and

another well-established musical practise: arrangement. Peter Szendy, in his book Listen: A

History of our Ears, considers musical arrangement as a form of interpretation and criticism, not

unlike Bovie’s view of translation. Szendy writes:

Now, it seems to me that what arrangers are signing is above all a listening. Their

hearing of a work. They may even be the only listeners in the history of music who write

down their listenings, rather than describe them (as critics do). And that is why I love

them, I who so love to listen to someone listening. I love hearing them hear. 70

69 Smith Palmer Bovie, “Translation as a Form of Criticism,” in The Craft & Context of Translation: A Symposium, eds. William Arrowsmith and Roger Shattuck (Austin, T.X.: University of Texas Press, 1961): 51. 70 Szendy, Listen: A History of our Ears, 35.

86

Szendy acknowledges that arrangement often serves basic functions of “communication

and diffusion”. That is, arrangements are more accessible to certain audiences. A reduced 71

instrumentation might allow for easier distribution, as well as performances by smaller groups.

For Szendy, however, such practical functions are of lesser concern. Szendy is

interested in listening to an arrangement as an educated listener already familiar with the source

material. It is precisely the individual perspective of the arranger, as a fellow listener and critic,

that piques Szendy’s curiosity. Szendy describes this mode of listening as “hearing double.” 72

The interplay between the imaginary original and the experienced arrangement offers insights

into both works. Szendy writes: “what I hear in some way is that the originality of the original

receives its own place from its being put to the test of plasticity.” 73

Szendy goes on to relate arrangement to literary translation, invoking the writings of

Walter Benjamin, among others. Once again, it is the relationship between translation and

original that occupies Szendy’s focus. It is what a translation “leaves to be desired” that is of

greatest interest to Szendy and Benjamin. Translation and original enter into a kind of mutual 74

interdependence, each elaborating on and expressing what is missing in the other. Szendy

writes that “the original would not have been the original (in the canonical or sacred sense of the

word) without translation, which it summons.” 75

Singable translations are a curious hybrid of literary translation and musical

arrangement. This connection is particularly relevant when we treat a text as musical material by

considering the expressive effects of that text’s physical sounds. As the arranger seeks musical

transformations to render a piece with a new set of instruments, the translator similarly aims to

71 Ibid., 44. 72 Ibid., 36. 73 Ibid., 36. 74 Ibid., 54. 75 Ibid., 55.

87

transform text. For the translator, the musical restrictions are more strict, since few to no

modifications to the score are typically permitted.

Phonetic choices on the translator’s part are analogous to two of the arranger’s

concerns: timbre and articulation. Each vowel has its own unique sound and character that can

serve an expressive function, similar to the timbral palette available to the arranger. A composer

may indicate a variety of articulatory instructions directly in a score: staccato, tenuto, and

accents, to name a few. The very physicality of language imposes a set of articulations upon a

text’s underlying music. For instance, plosives vary in force and abruptness, giving a wide range

of possible attacks and cut-offs for a note. In languages such as German, where certain

consonant groupings may lengthen or shorten vowels, the overall duration of a note can even

be modified by text.

The musical timbres and articulations afforded by a language’s phonetic palette,

together with meaning and poetic features such as rhyme and meter, are devices by which the

translator interprets and critiques texted music. The translator’s choices also encode a unique

perspective: a reading, at once personal and historical, of a piece. It is my hope that through

careful attention to the sounds of language, existing translation methods can be augmented to

heighten the value of singable translations, both as agents of accessibility, and as powerful

vehicles of interpretation.

88

Bibliography

Adams, David. A Handbook of Diction for Singers: Italian, German, French. 2nd ed. New York, N.Y.: Oxford University Press, 2008.

Apter, Ronnie and Mark Herman. "Translating Art Songs for Performance: Rachmaninoff's Six

Choral Songs." Translation Review 84, no. 1 (2012): 27-42. Apter, Ronnie and Mark Herman. Translating for Singing: The Theory, Art, and Craft of

Translating Lyrics. New York, N.Y.: Bloomsbury Academic, 2016. Beckett, C. "Translating Poetry: Creative Art Or Semantic Science? A Case Study."

Literator 21, no. 3 (2000): 75-90.

Berns, Janine. "The Phonological Representation of Affricates." Language and Linguistics Compass 10, no. 3 (2016): 142-156.

Bohn, Graziela Pigatto and Roseane Silva da Cruz. "The Role of the Brazilian Portuguese

Phonology in the Translation of Singable Lyrics." Working Papers Em Linguística 19, no. 2 (2019): 78-100.

Brower, Reuben A. 1908-1975. On Translation. Vol. 23. Cambridge: Harvard University

Press, 1959. Calvocoressi, M. D. “The Practice of Song-Translation." Music and Letters II, no. 4 (1921):

314-322. Delattre, Pierre and Bertil Malmberg. Studies in Comparative Phonetics: English,

German, Spanish and French. Heidelberg: J. Groos, 1981.

De'Ath, Leslie. "Language and Diction: Phonetic Transcription--what it Doesn't Tell Us." Journal of Singing - the Official Journal of the National Association of Teachers of Singing 70, no. 1 (2013): 59-74.

Desblache, Lucile. Music and Translation: New Mediations in the Digital Age. 1st 2019. ed.

London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2019. Dingemanse, Mark, Will Schuerman, Eva Reinisch, Sylvia Tufvesson, and Holger Mitterer.

"What Sound Symbolism can and Cannot do: Testing the Iconicity of Ideophones from Five Languages." Language 92, no. 2 (2016): e117-e133.

Drinker, Henry S. "On Translating Vocal Texts." The Musical Quarterly 36, no. 2 (1950):

225-240.

89

Feist, Jim. "’Sound Symbolism’ in English." Journal of Pragmatics 45, no. 1 (2013): 104.

Geoffrey Finch, “Phonetics and Phonology,” in Linguistic Terms and Concepts, ed. Geoffrey Finch. London: Macmillan Education UK, 2000.

Folkart, Barbara. Second Finding: A Poetics of Translation. Ottawa: University of Ottawa Press,

2007.

Frame, Donald M. "Pleasures and Problems of Translation." Translation Review 13, no. 1 (1983): 31-45.

Franzon, Johan. "Choices in Song Translation: Singability in Print, Subtitles and Sung

Performance." The Translator 14, no. 2 (2008): 373-399. Golomb, Harai. “Music-Linked Translation (MLT) and Mozart’s Operas: Theoretical,

Textual, and Practical Perspectives.” In Song and Significance: Virtues and Vices of Vocal Translation. Edited by Dinda L Gorlée. Rodopi: Amsterdam, 2005.

Gossett, Philip. Divas and Scholars: Performing Italian Opera. Chicago, I.L.: University of

Chicago Press, 2006. Graham, Arthur. "A New Look at Recital Song Translation." Translation Review 29, no. 1 (1989):

31-37. Heiberg, Harold. "Schubert in Singable English: Winter Journey." Journal of Singing 66, no. 4

(2010): 387-398. Hepokoski, James A. Music, Structure, Thought: Selected Essays. Burlington, V.T.: Ashgate,

2009. Hersey, Anna. "Lost in Translation." Journal of Singing 74, no. 4 (2018): 429-436. Heselwood, Barry. Phonetic Transcription in Theory and Practice. Edinburgh: Edinburgh

University Press, 2013. Hilson, Jeff. “Homophonic Translation: Sense and Sound.” In Music, Text and Translation,

edited by Helen Julia Minors. New York, N.Y.: Bloomsbury Academic, 2013. Hinton, Leanne, Johanna Nichols, and John J. Ohala. Sound Symbolism. New York, N.Y.:

Cambridge University Press, 1994.

90

International Phonetic Association. Handbook of the International Phonetic Association: A Guide to the use of the International Phonetic Alphabet. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press, 1999.

Johnston, Amanda. English and German Diction for Singers: A Comparative Approach.

Lanham, M.D.: Scarecrow Press, 2011. Krebs, Harald. Fantasy Pieces: Metrical Dissonance in the Music of Robert Schumann.

New York, N. Y.: Oxford University Press, Accessed April 2, 2020. ProQuest Ebook Central. Lodge, Ken. "Phonological Translation and Phonetic Repertoire." International Journal of

Applied Linguistics 13, no. 2 (2003): 263-276. Low, Peter. "Singable Translations of Songs." Perspectives 11, no. 2 (2003): 87-103. Low, Peter. Translating Song. New York, N.Y.: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group,

2017. Low, Peter. "Translating Songs that Rhyme." Perspectives 16, no. 1-2 (2008): 1-20.

Low, Peter. "When Songs Cross Language Borders: Translations, Adaptations and 'Replacement Texts'." The Translator 19, no. 2 (2013): 229-244.

O'Brien, Mary Grantham, Sarah M. B. Fagan. German Phonetics and Phonology: Theory and Practice. New Haven, C.T.: Yale University Press, 2016.

Orr, C. W. "The Problem of Translation." Music & Letters 22, no. 4 (1941): 318-332.

Penrod, Lynn. "Adventures in Music Translation: Italian Songs and Arias (Aka ‘The Yellow Book’) and Me." Transcultural 9, no. 1 (2017): 63-77.

Raffel, Burton. The Art of Translating Poetry. University Park, P.A.: Pennsylvania State

University Press, 1988. Robinson, Douglas, 1954. Western Translation Theory: From Herodotus to Nietzsche. 2nd ed.

Northampton, M.A.: St. Jerome Pub, 2002. Schubert, Franz and Jeremy Sams. Accompanying booklet to Winter Journey, performed by

Christopher Glynn and Roderick Williams. Signum Classics SIGCD531. 2018. Shattuck, Roger and William Arrowsmith. The Craft & Context of Translation: A Symposium.

Austin, T.X.: University of Texas Press, 1961.

91

Stopar, Andrej. "Mamma Mia, A Singable Translation." English Language Overseas Perspectives and Enquiries 13, no. 1 (2016): 141-159.

Strangways, A. H. Fox. "Song-Translation." Music & Letters II, no. 3 (1921): 211-224. Szendy, Peter and Jean-Luc Nancy. Listen: A History of our Ears. New York, NY: Fordham

University Press, 2008. Tunbridge, Laura. "Singing Translations: The Politics of Listening between the Wars."

Representations 123, no. 1 (2013): 53-86. Tunbridge, Laura. Singing in the Age of Anxiety: Lieder Performances in New York and London

between the World Wars. Chicago, I.L.: University of Chicago Press, 2018.